Promotion and Tenure, Museum Studies Program

 

Scope and Purpose. The award of tenure and/or promotion in rank are among the most important and far-reaching decisions made by the Museum Studies Program because an excellent faculty is an essential component of any outstanding institution of higher learning. Promotion and tenure decisions also have a profound effect on the lives and careers of faculty. Recommendations concerning promotion and/or tenure must be made carefully, based upon a thorough examination of the candidate’s record and the impartial application of these criteria and procedures, established in compliance with the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FSRR) Article VI. 

 

It is the purpose of this document to promote the rigorous and fair evaluation of the performance of faculty and unclassified academic staff who hold faculty-equivalent rank during the promotion and tenure process. It does so by (a) establishing criteria that express the Museum Studies Program’s expectations for meeting University standards in terms of disciplinary practices; (b) providing procedures for the initial evaluation of teaching, scholarship, service, and (in the case of unclassified academic staff) professional performance; (c) preserving and enhancing the participatory rights of candidates, including the basic right to be informed about critical stages of the process and to have an opportunity to respond to negative evaluations; and (d) clarifying the responsibilities, roles, and relationships of the participants in the promotion and tenure review process.

 

Each level of review, including the initial review, the intermediate review, and the University level review, conducts an independent evaluation of a candidate’s record of performance and makes independent recommendations to the next review level. Later stages of review neither affirm nor reverse earlier recommendations, which remain part of the record for consideration by the Chancellor. It is the responsibility of each person involved in the review process to exercise his/her own judgment to evaluate a faculty member’s teaching, scholarship, and service based upon the entirety of the data and information in the record. No single source of information, such as peer review letters, shall be considered a conclusive indicator of quality.

 

Academic Freedom. All faculty members, regardless of rank, are entitled to academic freedom in relation to teaching and scholarship, and the right as citizens to speak on matters of public concern. Likewise, all faculty members, regardless of rank, bear the obligation to exercise their academic freedom responsibly and in accordance with the accepted standards of their academic disciplines.

 

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest. Consideration and evaluation of a faculty member’s record is a confidential personnel matter. Only those persons eligible to vote on promotion and/or tenure may participate in or observe deliberations or have access to the personnel file (except that clerical staff may assist in the preparation of documents under conditions that assure confidentiality). Eligible persons shall include the program’s tenured faculty with the rank for which they are applying, or higher, and the program’s unclassified academic staff with rank equivalent to or higher than the rank for which they are applying. For both faculty and unclassified academic staff, at least 0.25 FTE in the program is required for eligibility. If the promotion and tenure committee (see “Promotion and Tenure Committee” heading below) has been constituted with affiliate faculty members with the necessary rank, they are also eligible to observe deliberations and access the personnel file.

 

No person shall participate in any aspect of the promotion and tenure process concerning a candidate when participation would create a clear conflict of interest or compromise the impartiality of an evaluation or recommendation.

 

If a candidate believes that there is a conflict of interest, the candidate may petition to have that person recuse him/herself. If a committee member does not recuse him/herself, a decision about whether that person has a conflict of interest shall be made by a majority of the other committee members.

 

 

General Principles. The University strives for a consistent standard of quality against which the performance of all faculty members is measured. Nonetheless, the nature of faculty activities varies across the University and a faculty member’s record must be evaluated in light of his/her particular responsibilities and the expectations of the discipline. These criteria state the Museum Studies Program’s expectations of performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, service, and (in the case of unclassified academic staff) professional performance necessary to satisfy the University standards for promotion for the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor and for promotion to full professor, or equivalent ranks.

 

Teaching and scholarship should normally be given primary consideration, but the particular weight to be accorded to each component of a faculty member’s activities depends upon the responsibilities of the faculty member. The College has traditionally recognized the 40-40-20 formula for weighting teaching, scholarship, and service, except when weight is differentiated for unclassified academic staff members pursuant to their job description.

 

Teaching. Teaching is a primary function of the University, which strives to provide an outstanding education for its students. The evaluation of teaching includes consideration of syllabi, course materials, and other information related to a faculty member’s courses; peer and student evaluations; a candidate’s own statement of teaching philosophy and goals; public representations of teaching; and other accepted methods of evaluation, which may include external evaluations.

High quality teaching is serious intellectual work grounded in a deep knowledge and understanding of the field and includes the ability to convey that understanding in clear and engaging ways.

 

The conduct of classes is the central feature of teaching responsibilities at KU, but teaching also includes supervising student research and clinical activities, mentoring and advising students, and other teaching-related activities outside of the classroom.

 

Under the University standards for the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor, the record must demonstrate effective teaching, as reflected in such factors as command of the subject matter, the ability to communicate effectively in the classroom, a demonstrated commitment to student learning, and involvement in providing advice and support for students outside the classroom.

In the Museum Studies Program, the following teaching expectations to meet University standards apply for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor:

 

Candidates for tenure and/or promotion to associate professor should think in terms of building a teaching profile for evaluation by the Program, College, and University promotion and tenure committees. This profile should include a variety of evaluative elements from the entire scope of teaching activities in an interdisciplinary program, including informal student advising and mentoring, offering directed readings and independent study courses as necessary, and formal roles serving on student final product (master’s) committees.

 

As indicated by multiple sources of evaluation (outlined above), the record must demonstrate that a candidate’s teaching, to an adequate or greater extent, reflects knowledge of their field and the recent developments therein, and that the candidate is effective in encouraging students' interest, helping them to think critically and to apply their knowledge, pointing them toward the broader implications of their study, and generally encouraging their development as museum professionals. The record must also give indication of responsible fulfillment of all duties associated with teaching, including prompt and regular holding of class sessions and office hours, timely and sufficient grading and comments on assignments, acceptable and fair expectations and criteria for student work (as judged by disciplinary standards), adequate class preparation, and effective use of class time.

 

Under the University standards for promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate continued effectiveness and growth as a teacher, as reflected in such factors as mastery of the subject matter, strong classroom teaching skills, an ongoing commitment to student learning, and active involvement in providing advice and support for students outside the classroom.

 

In the Museum Studies Program, the following teaching expectations to meet University standards apply for the promotion to the rank of professor: effective service as a chair of final product (master’s) committees; regular and competent service on other final product (master’s) committees; consistently strong evaluation by students and faculty using objective data where available; willingness to respond to the Program’s teaching needs, including offering directed readings and independent study courses as necessary; and success in creating and teaching innovative courses in response to developments in the profession.

 

Scholarship. The concept of “scholarship” encompasses not only traditional academic research and publication, but also the creation of artistic works or performances and any other products or activities accepted by the academic discipline as reflecting scholarly effort and achievement for purposes of promotion and/or tenure. While the nature of scholarship varies among disciplines, the University adheres to a consistently high standard of quality in its scholarly activities to which all faculty members, regardless of discipline, are held. 

 

In the Museum Studies Program, scholarship is defined as the production of relevant articles, book chapters, books, and exhibition catalogs; the presentation of papers or lectures; participation in symposia at conferences, meetings of Museum Studies and other academic societies, and in other academic forums; and writing grant proposals to fund personal or institutional research programs. 

 

Given the professional, public-oriented nature of the Museum Studies profession, scholarship can also take the form of designing public-facing exhibitions (whether at museums or in digital format), engaging in curatorial or archiving projects, the development of educational curricula, or tools to aid in collections or digitization management. This list is meant to be suggestive, not exhaustive, in recognition of the interdisciplinary purview of Museum Studies, as well as the field’s ongoing evolution in digital methods. Key to the evaluation of such activities as scholarship is that they are informed by research and contribute to scholarly discourse in the field. They should reflect scholarly effort, academic rigor, and achievement for the purposes of tenure and/or promotion. Further, it is expected that research be disseminated to appropriate scholarly/public audiences and that they are subject to critical peer evaluation. Research achievement will be evaluated through the solicited external reviews, unpublished peer reviews, and published reviews of published works, as available.

 

Much of the advancement of museums depends on collaborative efforts. In museums, participation in collaborative scholarship is acknowledged as requiring an application of knowledge and expertise equivalent to that demonstrated in individual research and publication. Since the processes and rewards of tenure and/or promotion pertain to the accomplishments of the individual, not the group, clarification will be extended indicating the individual candidate’s role and particular achievement in collaborative research endeavors.

 

Under the University standards for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor, the record must demonstrate a successfully developing scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as the quality and quantity of publications or creative activities, external reviews of the candidate’s work by respected scholars or practitioners in the field, the candidate’s regional, national, or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive scholarly agenda.

 

In the Museum Studies Program, the following scholarship expectations to meet University standards apply for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor: Candidates must present clear evidence of an established research program that goes well beyond the research completed for the Ph.D. and postdoctoral training, and that exhibits promise of continuing productivity. 

As an interdisciplinary field, scholarship in Museum Studies can take many forms. For those whose scholarship takes the form of written books and articles, candidates should have in print or formally accepted and scheduled for publication either (a) a book-length peer-reviewed or refereed study with a respected press in the field or subfield, or (b) at least five substantial peer-reviewed or refereed articles in respected journals in the field or subfield, and/or substantial peer-reviewed or refereed chapters in books with a respected press in the field or subfield, or (c) refereed exhibition catalogs, critical editions, collected volumes, journal issues, compilations, translations, or electronic publications. Categories (b) and (c) may be mixed.

 

The Museum Studies Program considers public-oriented scholarship and practice of equal merit and significance to published research. For those whose scholarship takes the form of curating collections, designing public exhibits (whether at an institution or in digital format), developing educational curricula, designing professional tools, we encourage faculty to provide information about how the output was refereed/peer-reviewed and its public impact(s).

 

Writing grant applications and being awarded university and extramural funds are an indication of scholarly output and a strong research program and can aid in evaluating the trajectory of a candidate’s scholarship but cannot stand in for the above-listed scholarly outputs when evaluating a candidate for tenure.

 

Under the University standards for promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate an established scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as a substantial and ongoing pattern of publication or creative activity, external reviews of the candidate’s work by eminent scholars or practitioners in the field, the candidate’s national or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive scholarly career.

 

In the Museum Studies Program, the following scholarship expectations to meet University standards also apply for the promotion to the rank of professor. The candidate must show continued development and future sustainability of a mature research program and should demonstrate national and/or international recognition as scholars.

 

In addition to work published or formally accepted and scheduled for publication at the time of their promotion to associate professor, candidates should have in print or formally accepted and scheduled for publication either (a) a book-length peer-reviewed or refereed study with a respected press in the field or subfield, or (b) at least five substantial peer-reviewed or refereed articles in respected journals in the field or subfield, and/or substantial peer-reviewed or refereed chapters in books with a respected press in the field or subfield, or (c) refereed exhibition catalogs, critical editions, collected volumes, journal issues, compilations, translations, or electronic publications. Categories (b) and (c) may be mixed.

 

The Museum Studies Program considers public-oriented scholarship and practice of equal merit and significance to published research. For those whose scholarship takes the form of curating collections, designing public exhibits (whether at an institution or in digital format), developing educational curricula, designing professional tools, we encourage faculty to provide information about how the output was refereed/peer-reviewed and its public impact(s).

 

Writing grant applications and being awarded university and extramural funds are an indication of scholarly output and a strong research program and can aid in evaluating the trajectory of a candidate’s scholarship but cannot stand in for the above-listed scholarly outputs when evaluating a candidate for promotion to full professor.

 

Service. Service is an important responsibility of all faculty members that contributes to the University’s performance of its larger mission. Although the nature of service activities will depend on a candidate’s particular interests and abilities, service contributions are an essential part of being a good citizen of the University. The Museum Studies Program accepts and values service within the University, scholarly service to the discipline or profession, and community outreach at the local, state, national, or international level.

 

In the Museum Studies Program, service includes regular and meaningful participation in activities necessary to the successful functioning of the Program, College, and/or University. Within the program, this includes service on the Museum Studies Executive Committee, as well as activities such as student recruitment, administration, and reviewing student applications. Wider university activities include service on College or University committees, on governance institutions, holding an administrative position, etc. Service external to the university includes community outreach, memberships on committees or institutional boards of directors, memberships on editorial or advisory boards; judging grant and prize competitions, offices in professional organizations, conducting ad hoc workshops, and organizing conferences or lectures. These lists are meant to be suggestive, not exhaustive.

 

Under the University standards for the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor, the record must demonstrate a pattern of regular, meaningful service at all three levels: within the University; to the discipline or profession; and community outreach (local, state, national, and/or international).

 

Under the University standards for promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate a pattern of ongoing, substantial service that reflects meaningful contributions to the University at multiple levels, to the discipline or profession, and community outreach (local, state, national, and/or international). Promotion to the rank of professor includes the above-listed activities, with a particular emphasis on leadership. Such roles may include administrative offices within the University, disciplinary/professional organizations, and/or within the community; service in an editorial capacity for publications or as a referee for journals/presses/exhibitions/tenure reviews. This list is meant to be suggestive, not exhaustive.

 

Rating for Performance. Using the criteria described above, the candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, service, and (in the case of unclassified academic staff) professional performance will be rated using the terms “excellent,” “very good,” “good,” “marginal,” or “poor,” defined as follows:

 

a. “Excellent” means that the candidate substantially exceeds expectations for tenure and/or promotion to this rank.

b. “Very Good” means the candidate exceeds expectations for tenure and/or promotion to this rank.

c. “Good” means the candidate meets expectations for tenure and/or promotion to this rank.

d. “Marginal” means the candidate falls below expectations for tenure and/or promotion to this rank.

e. “Poor” means the candidate falls significantly below expectations for tenure and/or promotion to this rank.

 

Absent exceptional circumstances, no candidate may be recommended for tenure and/or promotion without meeting standards in all applicable areas of performance.

 

Pre-Tenure Matters. The Director of the program will aid new faculty and unclassified academic staff in developing a mentoring plan to guide pre-tenure faculty through the early stage of their career. Mentoring plans will provide appropriate information and guidance to assist faculty members in the development of their teaching, scholarship, and service, as well as recommendations to document their achievements in these areas for the purpose of the tenure process.

 

The unit shall provide faculty members with information concerning the standards and procedures for award of tenure and promotion in rank, including copies of the written criteria and procedures approved by the program (this document), as well as the Provost’s guidelines and forms.

 

To assess faculty progress, the Museum Studies Program conducts a Progress Toward Tenure Review (PTTR) assessment in accordance with the policy defined by the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences here: 

 

Neither the record of the PTTR review nor its results shall be included in a faculty member’s promotion and/or tenure record. Recommendations for or against promotion and tenure should not by influenced by favorable or unfavorable results of the PTTR process. In certain cases, the PTTR process may culminate in recommendation for non-reappointment prior to tenure, in compliance with the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations section VI.4.3, available here: https://policy.ku.edu/governance/FSRR#art6sect4. 

 

 

The Museum Studies Program conducts the initial review of the candidate pursuant to the procedures and requirements of section 5 of Article VI of the FSRR in connection with the candidate’s responsibility in the Museum Studies Program.

 

Promotion and Tenure Committee. For any faculty member seeking promotion and/or tenure in a given year, their application shall be evaluated by a promotion and tenure committee, established as follows. Their committee shall include the program’s tenured faculty with the rank for which they are applying, or higher, and the program’s unclassified academic staff with rank equivalent to or higher than the rank for which they are applying. For both faculty and unclassified academic staff, at least 0.25 FTE in the program is required for membership on the committee. If the committee constituted in this way has fewer than three people, one or two Affiliate faculty members with the necessary rank are asked to the serve on the committee, in consultation with the Executive Dean of the College.

 

No students, faculty, or staff, other than those indicated above, shall serve on a faculty member’s promotion and tenure committee. No person shall serve simultaneously on more than one committee (department, college, or university) considering promotion and tenure, except when serving as a member of a committee of the whole. The Museum Studies Director, having an independent responsibility to evaluate a candidate, shall not serve as a member of the college committee conducting intermediate review, nor on the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure.

 

Initiation of Review. Prior to the beginning of the spring semester, the Provost shall notify all faculty whose mandatory review year will be the following academic year, with copies provided to unit administrators and the dean. Upon receipt of this notice or if a faculty member requests it prior to the mandatory review year, the unit shall initiate procedures for evaluating the candidate for the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank.

 

At or before the beginning of the spring semester, the unit shall consider the qualifications of all faculty members below the rank of full professor, with a view toward possible promotion in rank during the following academic year. After considering a faculty member’s qualifications, if the unit determines that those qualifications may warrant promotion in rank, or if the faculty member requests it, the unit shall initiate procedures for reviewing the faculty member for promotion to full professor.

 

Preparation of the Promotion and/or Tenure File. NOTE: Candidates who hold joint appointments prepare only one set of promotion and/or tenure materials for review by both units in which they hold an appointment. The initial review units (i.e., departments, centers, etc.) shall consult with each other on their evaluations and the evaluation process, but each initial review unit must provide a separate evaluation of the candidate’s performance in the unit. Please refer to the Promotion and Tenure Procedures for the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences for detailed instructions. It is the responsibility of the candidate to complete the appropriate portions of the form and provide necessary documents and information in accordance with the Provost’s guidelines, with assistance from the Museum Studies Program.

 

The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall receive the form and accompanying materials from the candidate and finish compiling the record of the candidate’s teaching, scholarship, and service in accordance with the Provost’s guidelines.

 

The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall provide for the solicitation of outside reviewers to assist in the evaluation of a faculty member’s scholarship and in accordance with College procedures. Emphasis shall be placed on selecting independent reviewers in the same or related discipline who hold academic rank or a professional position equal to or greater than the rank for which the candidate is being considered. The committee shall give the candidate the opportunity to suggest individuals to be included or excluded from the list of reviewers. The committee, however, is responsible for using its judgment in the final selection of reviewers. For College specific requirements and guidelines, please refer to “Section B. Process for Obtaining Evaluation Letters from External Reviewers” within the College’s posted policy for promotion and/or tenure.

 

When soliciting external reviews of a candidate’s scholarship, the Promotion and Tenure Committee shall inform prospective reviewers of the extent to which the candidate will have access to the review. The College's confidentiality policy regarding soliciting external reviewers for the promotion and/or tenure review process is as follows:

 

 

Recommendations. Upon completion of the record, the committee conducting the initial review shall evaluate the candidate’s record of teaching, scholarship, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and make recommendations in accordance with the voting procedures detailed below.

 

In the Museum Studies Program, voting procedures are as follows: All members of Promotion and Tenure Committee have full voting rights in the committee. A quorum consisting of more than 50% of the committee members must be present for any votes to be binding. The voting procedures are by open ballot; each member of the Promotion and Tenure Committee is asked to recommend or not recommend promotion and/or tenure. These votes are counted and tallied by the committee chair in order to arrive at the final recommendation. A simple majority of votes is required for a favorable recommendation. The Museum Studies Program as a whole follows the same voting procedure for rating of the candidate’s performance.

 

The committee shall prepare the promotion and/or tenure evaluation and summary forms. Both the review committee and candidate will go through the checklist of the review form to ensure all required items are included and the candidate’s dossier contains all required items. Both the committee and candidate shall verify this by signing the form. The forms and recommendations shall be forwarded to the Director, who shall indicate separately, in writing, whether he or she concurs or disagrees with the recommendations of the review committee. The Museum Studies Program Director shall provide the candidate with a copy of the promotion and/or tenure summary form. In cases of non-mandatory reviews for tenure and/or promotion, the record of a candidate who has received a negative unit-level recommendation will be forwarded to intermediate-level review only if the candidate requests it.

 

Favorable recommendations, together with the record of the initial review, shall be forwarded to the College Committee on Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure conducting the intermediate review. Negative recommendations resulting from an initial review shall go forward for intermediate review only if it is the candidate’s mandatory review year or if the candidate requests it.

 

In the event of a negative recommendation that will not be forwarded automatically, the Director will inform the candidate by email that they may request that the record be forwarded for further review at least 72 hours in advance of the College Dean’s Office’s deadline for units to submit P&T dossiers. If the candidate wishes for their record to be forwarded to the College Dean’s Office for further review, they must notify the director by 24 hours before that deadline.

 

 

The candidate may submit a written response to a negative recommendation by the Museum Studies Program, or to a final rating of teaching, research, or service below the level of “good” included in the evaluation section of the recommendation. The written response is sent separately by the candidate to College Dean’s Office.

 

A request for information by CCAPT and/or UCPT shall be sent to the Museum Studies Program Director who shall immediately provide a copy to the candidate and inform the Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Director and/or committee shall prepare the Museum Studies Program’s response in accordance with the initial review procedures.

 

The candidate shall be afforded an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the Museum Studies Program’s response and/or to submit his/her own documentation or comment to the CCAPT and/or UCPT.