Applies to: Career Track Faculty: Teaching Sub-Track including those on full or part-time appointments eligible for promotion. (job classes 158, 159, 160)
Career Track: Teaching Sub-Track Introduction
Career track faculty may hold continuous, one (1) to five (5) year fixed term (with or without a rolling horizon), or contingent contracts. Appointments are renewable, contingent upon the needs of the department and the college, and satisfactory annual performance. Career track appointments must include a specified sub-track title and rank in the appointment (e.g., teaching assistant professor, teaching associate professor, teaching professor). The teaching sub-track provides for advancement in rank from Assistant to Associate to Full Professor. All career track appointments should align with current Washington Administrative Code Regulations (WAC250-61-100).
Faculty in the teaching sub-track are non-tenure track appointees whose primary responsibility is teaching and/or student advising with little to no additional expectations in research/scholarship and/or creative activity, leadership, or academic service. Faculty with a teaching appointment will often have large teaching commitments (e.g., four or more courses or sections of courses per semester), according to their appointment and contract. In the Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, teaching may involve teaching in a clinical setting. Promotion criteria are determined by the department and college and should include evidence of teaching effectiveness and innovation. Candidates for promotion shall be evaluated in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Washington State University Faculty Manual, the College of Medicine Guidelines for Promotion of Teaching Career Sub-Track Faculty (this document), and specific expectations and criteria as outlined in departmental teaching career sub-track promotion guidelines.
1.0 Guidelines for the Appointment and Promotion of Career Teaching Sub-Track Faculty
The college recognizes that teaching occurs in a variety of modes and environments outside of the formal classroom, individual or group lessons, clinic, or laboratory settings. Work such as independent studies, mentoring and informal or formal advising, and advancing student professional development may also be an element of a promotion case in this track.
Excellence in teaching should be presented and assessed through multiple measures and with attention to the teaching that has occurred throughout a candidate’s time in rank. While high student evaluation scores are perhaps the most immediately accessible means of demonstrating excellence in teaching, such scores by themselves will not be determinative for promotion, nor will individual instances of lower teaching evaluations necessarily prevent promotion. Additional measures of teaching excellence may include peer evaluations, participation or leadership in program assessment and development, selection and development of teaching material (both proprietary and open education resources), effective engagement with larger unit and discipline efforts to advance pedagogy and curricula, internal and external awards, and presentation or publication of material regarding teaching in appropriate professional outlets.
The teaching track faculty contribute primarily to the teaching mission of the college. Depending on their role in the college, their contributions may differ. Each department within the college that employs teaching faculty should have its own, more detailed policies and expectations regarding promotion of teaching track faculty. Requests for appointments or promotion of teaching track faculty are made to the Dean and the Faculty Rank, Promotion, and Tenure Committee (FRPT) through department chairs or associate chairs (e.g., at outlying campuses). Appointments at the rank of teaching assistant professor do not require review by the FRPT. Candidates for promotion shall be evaluated in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Faculty Manual of Washington State University.
The college may make teaching track faculty appointments to best serve programmatic needs by appointing persons whose expertise would benefit its mission. While teaching faculty are encouraged to contribute in areas other than teaching (i.e., research/scholarship and/or creative activity, leadership, or academic service), it is understood that based on their appointment to the teaching sub-track, contributions beyond teaching are not generally expected unless these responsibilities are stated in the letter of offer and/or negotiated and documented thereafter as department/college needs evolve. Most teaching track faculty will focus primarily on teaching. One goal of the college is to promote a culture of collaboration, collegiality, and diversity. Therefore, promotion materials should describe how the candidate has contributed toward this goal as appropriate to their assigned scope of work (e.g., partnering with other WSU departments/colleges and community partners, team teaching, guest lecturing, etc.). Evidence of involvement in college activities, such as attending college sponsored education activities, grand rounds, and other department or college-wide activities may also demonstrate collegiality.
The promotion procedures for teaching faculty are similar to those established for tenure-track appointments, except that the required four letters may be all external, all internal, or a combination of the two. These letters may come from WSU faculty outside the candidate’s home department or from others familiar with the candidate’s role (e.g., professional associations or external agencies). Letters may be obtained from no more than two individuals recommended by the candidate. At least two should be from faculty who are tenured or teaching track faculty who hold the rank to which the faculty member aspires and are not members of the faculty advisory committee. Other letters may come from internal individuals who will not submit advisory recommendations on the candidate’s promotion or external individuals who are uniquely qualified to speak to the specific accomplishments of the candidate to which other faculty might not be qualified to speak. For example, a teaching track faculty member may have made a significant national contribution to teaching pedagogy that would be part of a promotion case. Letters should not be solicited from the candidate’s former professors, mentors, or colleagues. In addition to four letters, candidates seeking promotion to teaching associate professor or teaching professor must include two peer evaluations of recent teaching (within the prior three years of an application) in their promotion materials. The reviewers will be provided with copies of the candidate’s curriculum vitae, educator portfolio, peer evaluations, department and college teaching sub-track promotion guidelines, and any additional materials (except annual reviews) documenting the candidate’s accomplishments. Faculty may also submit a context statement, a service statement, a DEI statement, and a COVID-19 impact statement. The consultant reviewers will be asked to provide an evaluation of the excellence and impact of the candidate’s work and professional contribution.
Criteria for promotion of teaching track faculty are described under Procedures (4.0) below. Time in rank is not a criterion for promotion; however, only under extraordinary circumstances will faculty be considered for promotion prior to the beginning of the sixth year of service in their current rank. All eligible departmental faculty must evaluate and submit an advisory recommendation on the candidate. Only eligible departmental faculty with personal conflicts of interest (e.g., spouses, family members) are allowed to abstain. If a department has fewer than five faculty who are eligible to submit advisory recommendations, then the chair will work with the Dean and Provost’s office to identify additional eligible faculty across the college or University who will submit recommendations.
Committees including faculty outside the candidate’s department are considered to be “augmented” committees. All department career track (i.e., clinical, teaching, research, and scholar tracks) associate professors and professors, and tenure track/tenured associate professors and professors and other members of the augmented committee are eligible to submit advisory recommendations on candidates seeking promotion to teaching associate professor. All department career track professors and tenure track/tenured professors and other members of the augmented committee are eligible to submit advisory recommendations on candidates seeking promotion to teaching professor. Individuals, such as chairs or members of the FRPT committee, may only provide one written recommendation (i.e., they cannot submit advisory recommendations twice). These individuals can, however, participate in discussions of the candidate if, for instance, they serve on the college FRPT. All eligible department faculty and other members of the augmented committee must be provided with the full promotion packet (except annual reviews), as well as time to review and comment on the candidate’s suitability for promotion.
The promotion packet reviewed by the faculty advisory committee (as well as all involved in subsequent stages of the review process [i.e., FRPT subcommittee, Dean, Chancellor, and Provost]) must include all materials provided the external reviewers, as well as all other materials prepared by the candidate, to allow the faculty advisory committee to assess the candidate’s overall performance in all areas of the candidate’s workload. Note: annual reviews are considered employment records and therefore are not shared with external reviewers, advisory committee members, or the FRPT. The chair’s evaluation of the candidate includes a summary of the faculty advisory recommendations. Faculty advisory recommendations and the chair’s evaluation are forwarded via the chair to the Dean along with the entire packet reviewed by the tenured faculty and the chair. College of Medicine FRPT committee members are then provided time to review the promotion packet, excluding the faculty advisory recommendations and the annual reviews. FRPT submits a written evaluation and recommendation to the Dean. The Dean evaluates the candidate and prepares a written summary.
2.0 Definitions
Annual Review
Teaching sub-track faculty performance is reviewed annually by the chair/associate chair for all who have served at WSU for a full year and who are expected to be on appointment in the subsequent year (i.e., have not officially resigned, retired, or have been given a terminal appointment). Principal Investigators who provide funding to or supervise a teaching sub-track faculty member will provide input. Reviews are also required for all teaching sub-track faculty on grant funding who may be eligible for salary increases if salary dollars are available and they are reappointed. Reviews for full-time teaching sub-track faculty (0.50 FTE or greater) require updating the designated WSU-wide faculty electronic system (i.e., Activity Insight). The period of each annual review is from January 1 to December 31. Full-time teaching sub-track faculty receive annual reviews that alternate every other year between abridged reviews and comprehensive reviews, as long as the faculty member is making satisfactory progress. If the annual review rating is “less than satisfactory,” the written report must include an explanation for the decision, clearly identify areas in which performance is deemed deficient and specific recommendations to correct the deficit to help the faculty member achieve a “satisfactory” or above annual review rating at the next review. All subsequent annual reviews will be comprehensive or intensive until a rating of “satisfactory” or better is achieved. Teaching sub-track faculty will receive an intensive review if they seek promotion. Part-time teaching sub-track faculty receive abridged reviews annually.
Results are submitted to the Office of the Provost by May 1 of the following year (e.g., May 1, 2020 for the 2019 annual review). The annual review provides feedback relative to the department expectations and guides critical personnel decisions. Faculty are to be evaluated in terms of their performance during the specified annual review period, in relevant areas as specified for the faculty member’s sub-track, as described in this policy and by the faculty member’s department guidelines and policy. Teaching sub-track faculty should highlight contributions to teaching, teaching innovations, and teaching mastery, as well as student and peer evaluations and other indicators of quality performance and teaching effectiveness, and other areas in their negotiated scope of work.
Upon annual review completion, the faculty review is forwarded to the Dean and Vice President (VP) for Health Sciences. After receiving the annual review report, the chair shall provide the faculty member a minimum of ten (10) business days to sign the report, indicating that he or she has had the opportunity to read the report and to discuss it with the chair and/or appropriate faculty supervisors. A faculty member’s dissent regarding contents of the report may be appended to the signed report. When a dissent is appended, the faculty member must receive written acknowledgement within fifteen (15) business days that the statement has been reviewed by the chair’s immediate supervisor (normally the Dean) and VP of Health Sciences or designee (e.g., Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs). At the same time that a response is sent to the faculty member, the chair’s supervisor will forward to the Provost the annual review, the faculty member’s response to that review, and the supervisor’s response to the faculty member. After receiving these materials, the Provost has an additional fifteen (15) business days to provide a written acknowledgement to the faculty member and chair’s supervisor that he or she has reviewed all of the statements.
3.0 Responsibilities
FRPT Committee
Reviews cases for promotion and/or tenure. Annual reviews are not reviewed by the college FRPT Committee.
Department Chair
Conducts annual reviews for all unit faculty and coordinates and leads promotion reviews for unit faculty. Department chair is also responsible for providing e-copies of all annual reviews to Pullman Human Resource Services (HRS).
College of Medicine Dean/Dean’s Office
The Dean reviews all faculty annual reviews following review by the department chair, as well as all promotion reviews prepared by the department chair. Dean’s Office compiles and forwards a spreadsheet containing the college roster of all faculty required to undergo an annual review, their review type, and their assigned rating to the Provost’s Office. Dean’s Office is also responsible for posting all required materials in Teams for promotion reviews.
Provost/Provost’s Office
Reviews and renders final decision on all promotion cases.
4.0 Procedures
Candidates for promotion shall be evaluated in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Faculty Manual of Washington State University. Specific criteria and procedures for promotion of teaching sub- track faculty are elaborated below. Some faculty may place greater emphasis on certain activities and may be less involved in others. Each candidate should work with their chair (or associate chair at outlying campuses) to determine all materials needed for the promotion dossier.
Promotion to Teaching Associate Professor
Consistent with the Faculty Manual, teaching assistant professors typically are not considered for promotion to teaching associate professor prior to the sixth year of service at the rank of teaching assistant professor with the promotion, if granted, awarded at the end of the sixth (6) year. Exceptional candidates may be offered the opportunity to advance in rank prior to the sixth year of service. If promotion to teaching associate professor is not pursued or is not granted, faculty may remain at the rank of teaching assistant professor and be reappointed to subsequent terms at that rank after their sixth year of service, contingent upon funding, satisfactory performance and department and college need. Individuals who are not promoted may request promotion consideration at a later date once they and their chair believe they have successfully addressed the issues that led to an unsuccessful initial application.
Candidates for promotion to teaching associate professor are expected to demonstrate that their teaching effectively supports course and unit learning outcomes, and that it reflects the current state of knowledge and pedagogy in the discipline. Candidates for promotion to teaching associate professor should demonstrate the capacity to effectively communicate course content to students, and their course and assignment designs should be accessible to all students. These designs should also support student success and, where appropriate, active learning.
Promotion to teaching associate professor requires demonstration and evidence of teaching excellence (i.e., at a minimum “strong performance beyond satisfactory”). Faculty promoted to the rank of teaching associate professor may be appointed to terms of up to five years (with or without a rolling horizon) based on department and college need.
Promotion to Teaching Professor
Consistent with the Faculty Manual, teaching associate professors typically are not considered for promotion to teaching professor prior to the beginning of the sixth year of service at the rank of teaching associate professor. Exceptional candidates may be offered the opportunity to advance in rank prior to the sixth year of service. If promotion to teaching professor is not pursued or is not granted, faculty may remain at the rank of teaching associate professor and be reappointed to subsequent terms at that rank after their sixth year of service, contingent upon funding, satisfactory performance and department and college need. Faculty seeking promotion to teaching professor should confer with their chair one year prior to seeking promotion. Individuals who are not promoted may request promotion consideration at a later date once they and their chair believe they have successfully addressed the issues that led to an unsuccessful initial application.
Candidates for promotion to teaching professor are expected to demonstrate continuing effectiveness in the classroom, as well as elements of pedagogical growth and leadership beyond that which would characterize promotion to teaching associate professor. Candidates for promotion to teaching professor should demonstrate not only sustained excellence in classroom or clinical teaching but also innovation and further growth in their pedagogy, course and assignment design, and efforts toward student success.
Teaching professors are individuals who are nationally or internationally recognized for their teaching and teaching innovations, or other contributions in areas of responsibility as specified in the letter of offer and annual reviews. They have made sustained and significant contributions to their field and have gained recognition outside the university as a result. Promotion to teaching professor requires demonstration and evidence of teaching excellence (i.e., at a minimum “strong performance beyond satisfactory”).
Areas of Evaluation
Teaching
In the college, teaching may take a variety of forms including, but not limited to, classroom instruction, clinical supervision, and mentorship, advising, and serving on master’s or doctoral thesis committees if designated as a member of their department’s Graduate Faculty. It is incumbent on the applicant for promotion to document excellence in teaching. This is done primarily through the College Educator Portfolio. This document is prepared by the candidate and must be signed and dated by the candidate. This document is available online to all faculty within the college. It does not need to include all information (e.g., all student evaluations), but instead evidence that illustrates and supports the individual’s teaching excellence. The length and content of the educator portfolio may vary, consistent with the candidate’s involvement in teaching. Typically, the educator portfolio is no more than five pages (plus exhibits as appropriate). The following information should be included, as appropriate to one’s teaching assignment. See the College Educator Portfolio for additional elaboration.
Teaching Responsibilities
This should include a clear description of the candidate’s percent effort dedicated to teaching, the specific courses, components, sessions taught, work with individual students/trainees, settings in which supervision occurred, students advised or other advising activities, and graduate committee service. Descriptions should be as specific as possible and include information that allows for evaluation of the quantity and intensity of teaching. The topics listed below reflect a board concept of teaching. Others might be added.
- Instructional innovations.
- Development of instructional and/or assessment materials.
- Assessment of student learning outcomes.
- Extraordinary efforts with special groups of students.
- Using research in teaching: including using hands on research in the classroom or integrating scientific findings or methods into clinical supervision.
- Out of class evaluation activities: involvement in development or evaluation of new curriculum.
- Mentoring students, post-docs, trainees.
- Service on committees focused on instruction.
- Learning about teaching-efforts to improve teaching.
- Funded projects and projects under review for funding to improve teaching or improve clinical programs.
- Teaching continuing education courses.
Evaluations
This section should consist of summaries of data from whatever methods for evaluating teaching are used, including but not limited to evaluations by students. The candidate may include explanations of evaluations which they believe may be potentially misleading. Teaching evaluations may include: a. Student evaluations: includes results of student questionnaires, interviews of students.
- Measures of student learning (e.g., performance of students on standardized tests).
- Peer evaluations: includes ratings by peers regarding observation of teaching, review of instructional materials. Letters from colleagues might also be useful.
- Unsolicited correspondence from students, alumni, and employers of alumni.
- Teaching awards.
- Other evaluations.
Results
The results of teaching should be documented, and these include: a. Student/trainee successes: awards, admission to graduate or post-graduate programs, employment and other accomplishments for which the candidate deserves some credit.
- Instructional materials developed: textbooks written, teaching manuals, software.
- Contributions to the scholarship of teaching: including research about instruction, publication and presentation of these findings to university and nation-wide audiences.
- Educational leadership: evidence of impact beyond one’s own students.
- Other results, appendix, or exhibits may include syllabi, student evaluation forms, grade distributions.
Service
Service is essential to the success of the college and the University. While teaching faculty’s primary responsibility is teaching and/or student advising with little to no additional expectations in research/scholarship and/or creative activity, leadership, or academic service. they are encouraged to contribute in areas other than teaching (e.g., leadership or academic service), as negotiated within their scope of work. If the candidate has engaged in service, they should describe the service they have conducted, including service at or on behalf of WSU and outside WSU (e.g., professional associations). It is important that the applicant document their service in a level of detail that allows for accurate evaluation. Candidates should describe how they collaborated with others in their service. Service might include the following:
- Departmental, College or University committee service.
- Service in university administration.
- Involvement in relevant professional organization, including serving in a leadership or committee position.
- Involvement in local, state, national or international communities in a manner that improves the health and wellbeing of these communities.
- Serving on local, state, national or international advisory committees.
- Serving as a journal or grant reviewer.
- Efforts to promote diversity.
- Sponsorship or advising of student organizations.
- Supporting/mentoring other faculty in teaching, scholarship, or service. For promotion to Full Professor, mentorship of junior faculty.
- Representing the Department, College or University to external bodies.
5.0 Related Polices
6.0 Revision History
Original Approval: 05/26/2020
Guideline Number: G.FR.03.02.170721
Date Revision Approved: 05/10/2021, 02/07/2023