department menu

Retention, Tenure, and Promotion (RTP) Standards - Speech Language Pathology | Policies | CSUSM

Retention, Tenure, and Promotion (RTP) Standards - Speech Language Pathology

Definition: Standards governing RTP process for faculty in the Department of Speech Language Pathology (SLP).
Authority: The collective bargaining agreement between The California State University and the California Faculty Association.
Scope: Eligible SLP faculty at California State University San Marcos.
Responsible Division: Academic Affairs
Approval Date: 07/20/2017
Originally Implemented: 07/17/2014
Signature Page/PDF: View Signatures for Retention, Tenure, and Promotion (RTP) Standards - Speech Language Pathology

 

Procedure

I. Preamble

A. This document sets forth general standards and criteria for retention, tenure, and promotion of tenure-track faculty in the Department of Speech Language Pathology as a unit within the College of Education, Health, and Human Services.

B. The provisions of this document are to be implemented in conformity with University RTP Policies and Procedures; the CSU Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), Articles 13, 14, 15; and the University Policy on Ethical Conduct.

 C. The Department is guided also by the standards of the American Speech Language Hearing Association (ASHA).  Tenure Track faculty must comply with requirements specified by the Council on Academic Accreditation in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology of the American Speech-Language Hearing Association, as it relates to Standard 2.0 – Faculty, and must adhere to the ASHA code of Ethics.”1

II. Introduction and Guiding Principles

A. All standards and criteria reflect the University, College and Department Mission and Vision Statements and advance the goals embodied in those statements.

B. The performance areas that shall be evaluated include teaching, research/creative activities, and service.  While there will be diversity in the contributions of faculty members to the University, the Department affirms the university requirement of sustained high quality performance and encourages flexibility in the relative emphasis placed on each performance area.  The Department of SLP in its mission to prepare thoughtful practitioners places a distributed value on each of the following areas as such: 60% teaching, 20% research/creative activity and 20% service.  Candidates must submit a comprehensive curriculum vita (CV) and narrative statements describing the summary of teaching, research/creative activity, and service for the review period.  The faculty member must meet the minimum standards in each of the three areas.

C. Items assessed in one area of performance shall not be duplicated in any other area of performance evaluation.  Items shall be cross-referenced in the CV, narrative statements, and WPAF to demonstrate connections across all three documents. Candidates who integrate their teaching, research/creative activities, and/or service may explain how their work meets given standards/criteria for each area.

D. The Department recognizes innovative and unusual contributions (e.g., supervising research, using particularly innovative or challenging types of pedagogy, writing or rewriting programs, curriculum development, assessment development, accreditation or other required report generation).

E. Retention, tenure, and promotion decisions are made on the basis of the evaluation of individual performance.  Ultimate responsibility for understanding the standards, meeting the standards, and effectively communicating how they have met the standards rests with the Candidate.  In addition to this document, the Candidate should refer to and follow the University RTP Policies and Procedures.  Candidates should also note available opportunities that provide guidance on the WPAF and describe the responsibilities of the Candidate in the review process (e.g., Provost’s RTP meetings; Faculty Center Professional Development, and advice and counsel by tenured faculty).  Candidates are encouraged to avail themselves of such opportunities.

F. Candidates for retention will show effectiveness in each area of performance and demonstrate progress toward meeting the tenure requirements in the areas of teaching, research/creative activities, and services.

G. Candidates for the rank of Associate Professor require an established record of effectiveness in teaching, research/creative activities, and service to the Department, School and University.

H. Candidates for the rank of Professor require, in addition to continued effectiveness, an established record of initiative and leadership in teaching, research/creative activities, and service to the Department, School, University, community, and profession.  Promotion to the rank of Professor will be based on the record of the individual since promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.

I. The granting of tenure at any rank recognizes accomplishments and services performed by the Candidate during the individual’s career.  The record must show sustained and continuous activities and accomplishments.  The granting of tenure is an expression of confidence that the faculty member has both the commitment to and the potential for continued development and accomplishment throughout the individual’s career.  Tenure will be granted only to individuals whose record meets the standards required to earn promotion to the rank at which the tenure will be granted.

J. If service credit was granted at the time of employment at CSUSM, the Candidate’s teaching, research, and service activities completed at the university for which service credit was awarded at the time of hire will also be evaluated for the purpose of granting tenure and/or promotion.  Only items not considered in a prior tenure/promotion review at CSUSM may be included.

III. GENERAL STANDARDS

For general standards for retention, tenure, promotion, and early tenure/promotion see the applicable sections of the College and University RTP documents.

IV. STANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR TEACHING

A. Department Priorities and Values in Teaching and Learning

1. In the Department of Speech Language Pathology, “effective teaching” is defined as activity that promotes student learning, reflection, and professional growth in support of the Department Mission and is demonstrated by information in the teaching portfolio section of the WPAF. Teaching in the SLP should explicitly support the Mission Statement.  Teaching is multifaceted and may include instructional activity that takes place at off-site locations.

2. The most important teaching activities include, but are not limited to:

a. Classroom modality, face-to-face, blended, online, on-campus, off-site, distance learning teaching
b. Supervision of graduate and undergraduate students
c. Supervision of masters theses or projects and doctoral dissertations and research
d. Supervision of student independent study
e. Training and/or supervision of lecturers or colleagues
f. Student advising and counseling
g. Laboratory teaching
h. Clinical teaching/practice
i. Seminar courses
j. Undergraduate and graduate courses
k. Supervision of field work and independent research
l. Supervision of teaching and graduate assistants

3. Effective faculty members set clear student learning outcomes for their students, employ a range of instructional strategies, and teach in ways that effectively engage students in the learning process.

4. SLP approaches to support excellent teaching include collaboration, team teaching, service learning and co-teaching.

5. Evaluations of teaching will focus on determining a profile of the Candidate's teaching effectiveness.  To determine such a profile, teaching will be assessed by holistic evaluation of evidence, including Candidates’ reflective statement on teaching, student evaluations, reflective practice, and selected items that the Candidates believe best represent their teaching, as described in the University RTP document and further illustrated below in section B.


B. Required Evidence of Teaching

1. Teaching Reflective Statement
A reflective narrative including any selected items from section IV.A.2. (above) and all  teaching evidence discussed in the file should reflect continued success and/or improvement in teaching.  In this statement, Candidates shall provide a clear and concise reflective self-assessment of their teaching philosophy, experience, and performance.  The reflective statement may include the Candidates’ philosophy of teaching and learning, pedagogical connections between the techniques they employ when teaching and their philosophy of teaching and learning, impact of any notable teaching accomplishments or awards, improvements made as a result of lessons learned from their teaching and/or student evaluations, impact of course innovation or development, and/or their approach to supervision of graduate students.

 As part of the reflective statement, Candidates shall provide a brief summary of student evaluation ratings exemplifying teaching supported by a brief discussion of these evaluations.  Evaluation ratings and narrative shall specify rationale for categories chosen (e.g., quality of course, instructor preparedness, active learning encouraged) and particular teaching context (e.g., new prep, co-taught, curriculum modifications, extenuating circumstances).  Course evaluations and narrative should reflect evidence of thoughtful reflection on student ratings/feedback, concise discussion of changes based on the feedback and improvement over time in evaluations.

2. Teaching and/or Supervision Assignments
Evidence:  In the curriculum vita, the Candidate will list all courses and/or all student teaching supervision assignments for the period under review, as illustrated below.

Semester & Year Course Number Course Title Section Unites No. of Students Enrolled Comments Evaluation Ratings (specify categories/items referenced)

3. Student Evaluations from Teaching and/or Supervision Assignments
Evidence: Provide university-generated student evaluation reports representing all sections taught and student supervision assignments. Associate Professors include documentation since the last promotion.

4. Representative Syllabi from Courses Taught
Evidence: Provide a representative sample of syllabi from core courses taught that illustrate course objectives, student learning outcomes, sample assignments, and current practice in the field and instructional practices.  Associate Professors include documentation since the last promotion.

C. Optional Evidence of Teaching

1. Use of Exemplary Teaching Practices in Coursework and/or Clinical Practice
Evidence:  Provide evidence that illustrates the use of exemplary teaching practices.  Candidates might provide evidence that demonstrates the effective use of such things as technology, teaching strategies for diverse learners, student projects, student learning outcomes, portfolios, etc.

2. Curriculum, Program, and/or Course Development and/or Revision
Evidence:  Provide evidence that illustrates any new developments or improvements in curriculum, programs, and/or courses.  Evidence might include a brief description of improvements, curriculum forms, syllabi changes, links to online materials, etc.

3. Academic Advising
Evidence:  Provide evidence of effective academic advisement of students and the impact of this work.  Academic advisement includes the many ways the Candidate supported students in their academic pursuit, such as on a thesis or dissertation committee, mentorship on a research or graduate project, or as an academic advisor to a student in a program.  Evidence might include the names of the students, the role(s) the Candidate played, the dates of this work, and any evidence related to the impact.

4. Other Selected Items that Best Represent Candidate’s Teaching
Evidence: Additional evidence of teaching activities not listed above, including but are not limited to:

a. Assessment of student learning outcomes
b. Letters from former students (identified as solicited or unsolicited)
c. Teaching awards
d. Other activities to promote teaching excellence (e.g., self-evaluation, peer evaluation, in-service education of incumbent educators in the field)

D. Evaluation of Teaching

1. General Standards
Candidates will be assessed on the quality of the evidence provided on the set of indicators they select, rather than on the quantity of indicators selected. In all cases, Candidates will be assessed on the quality and the totality of the evidence provided.  When judged as a group, no one indicator may be used to determine the overall rating of teaching effectiveness. 

2. Tenure and/or Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor
At the Assistant Professor level, teaching that meets standards is expected to demonstrate classroom effectiveness for the types of courses taught.  Evidence of classroom effectiveness may include, but is not limited to student evaluations, syllabi that clearly articulate course objectives and requirements, effective instructional practices, engaging assignments directed at meeting the course objectives, documentation that illustrates clear connections throughout an entire teaching event, and assessments that effectively measure and align with student learning outcomes.

3. Tenure and/or Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor
As more experienced faculty, Associate Professors being considered for promotion to Professor are held to a higher standard.  Accordingly, to be rated meets standards, a Candidate at the Associate Professor level is expected to demonstrate a pattern of sustained effectiveness in teaching and curriculum related activities.

4. Retention
Candidates for retention shall include the required items for courses taught and additional optional materials in their teaching portfolio to show evidence of efforts and effectiveness in teaching.  Because this is an evaluation intended to provide guidance, Candidates will be assessed on their current teaching performance as well as on efforts that have been made to address prior performance feedback.

V. STANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITY

A. Department Priorities and Values in Research and Creative Activity

In the Department of Speech Language Pathology, research/creative activity is defined as creating, synthesizing, and disseminating knowledge beyond the classroom.  Research/creative activity may be basic, applied, integrative, reflective, and/or related to teaching and accreditation.

B. Department’s Research/Creative Activity Standards within Context of Discipline

Research/creative activities take many forms in the Department of Speech Language Pathology.  These may include, but are not limited to, qualitative, quantitative, and applied research conducted both individually and collaboratively.  Applied research is defined as creative activity that relates directly to the faculty member’s intellectual work.  This type of scholarship is carried out through such activities as program development, program or curriculum evaluation, policy analysis, action research, collaborative research with academics and community members, etc.  These activities are tied directly to the Professor's special field of knowledge and are aimed at substantive change in clinical practices.

Applied research requires rigor and accountability. Multi-author and cross-disciplinary presentations and publications are encouraged as the field of speech language pathology is multidisciplinary and values collaborative research and creative activities.  When multiple authors are present on research and creative activities, Candidates shall specify their specific role on the item (e.g. role: first author, second author, equal authorship, etc.).

C. Evidence of Research/Creative Activity

Evaluations of research/creative activity will focus on developing a profile of the Candidate’s research/creative activities as well as an understanding of the impact and benefit of their work.  To determine such a profile, the Candidate’s research/creative activities will be assessed by holistic evaluation of the Candidate’s reflective statement, work, and selected items that the Candidate believes best reflects their progress, as described in the University RTP document and further illustrated below.

Research/Creative Activity Reflective Statement

Candidates shall provide a clear reflective assessment of research/creative activities as well as the impact of this work.  The reflective statement may also include short-term and long-term goals for research/creative activities, connections between research/ creative activities and the courses taught, and the impact of research/ creative activities.

1. Category A Evidence must include external peer review process:

a. Papers published or accepted for publication in peer reviewed/refereed journals, including online journals
b. Peer or editor reviewed published book chapters of original material and original monographs
c. Peer or editor reviewed books, manuscripts, electronic or other projects and/or programs published or accepted for publication as works that contribute new knowledge and/or to practice as demonstrated by professional and academic reviewers
d. Peer reviewed/refereed presentations at national or international conferences
e. Significant program development including applied scholarship, curriculum writing, or accreditation work, which requires outside agency approval and/or peer review
f. Funded peer reviewed external grants for research/creative activity work, in progress or completed

2. Category B Evidence may include, but is not limited to:

a. Papers published in refereed proceedings
b. Refereed presentations at professional meetings
c. Invited presentations at professional meetings
d. Editor reviewed articles published in journals, newspapers, magazines, and other media
e. Published case studies
f. Applied research/creative activity that is published, presented at a conference or meeting, or applied in a professional setting
g. Published review of books, articles, programs, and conferences
h. Session discussant at a professional meeting
i. Invited keynote or speaker
j. Special recognition and awards for research/creative activities
k. Funded regional or internal grants for research/creative activity work (e.g., local organizations, University Professional Development, etc.)
l. Self-published books
m. Workshops
n. Unfunded peer reviewed external grants for research/creative activity work
o. Working papers
p. Submitted papers
q. Sponsored or contract research
r. Technical reports
s. Unfunded grants

D. Evaluation of Research/Creative Activities
1. General Standards

Candidates will be assessed on the quality of the evidence provided, the evidence of sustained scholarship, and the totality of their work.  A variety of types of work must be provided including peer reviewed publication.  When judged as a group, no one indicator of research/creative activities may be used to determine the overall rating of quality of research/creative activities.  In all cases, the reputation of the publication and/or meeting will be considered when evaluating the contribution.  All faculty members in the Department of SLP have a responsibility to engage in program development and accreditation activities associated with our two accrediting bodies (CAA of ASHA and the CCTC).  With changing standards and on-going assessment requirements, these peer-reviewed activities can be time intensive.  Faculty may therefore face limitations in the quantity of items in research/creative activity while they are engaged in peer-reviewed accreditation activities.

2. Tenure and/or Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor

a. At least three items from Category A (at least two items must be peer reviewed or refereed publications or grants).
b. At least three items from Category B
For early consideration for tenure and promotion Candidates must satisfy requirements for both subsections a and b, above.

3. Tenure and/or Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor*

a. At least three items from Category A (at least two items must be peer reviewed or refereed publications or grants).
b. At least three items from Category B

*Only items not considered in the last promotion may be considered.

4. Retention

Candidates for retention shall include documentation from the period under review that demonstrates satisfactory progress toward meeting the tenure requirements in the area of scholarship.  This documentation may include more items from category B than A.

VI. STANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR SERVICE

A. Department Priorities and Values regarding Service Contributions

The Department of Speech Language Pathology places a high value on service as an essential component of faculty work.  The Department views activities that enhance the institution and advance the profession at the local, state, national and international levels as integral components of faculty service.  In the Department, Service is defined as activities that contribute to the life of the department, school, college, university, community and/or activities that contribute to the profession and its agencies and organizations.

B. Evidence of Service

Evaluations of service will focus on determining a profile of the Candidate's service activity.  To determine such a profile, service will be assessed by holistic evaluation of the Candidates’ reflective statement, service work, and selected items that the Candidate believes best reflects their progress, as described in the University RTP document and further illustrated below.  Particular consideration should be given to the service necessary to develop courses/programs/majors and a campus structure of a growing campus.

1. Service Reflective Statement

Candidates are to provide a clear and concise reflective self-assessment of their service activities and the impact of this work.  Candidates may include statements regarding any short-term and long-term goals for service activities, connection to the Department, College and/or University’s Mission, reasons for their involvement, and the impact of their service activities.

2. Internal Service Activities

a. Evidence of Service to the Department, School, and/or College (D/S/C) may include, but is not limited to:

1) Leadership/membership in P/D/S/C governance and/or groups that carry on the business of the P/D/S/C (e.g., committees [elected or appointed], ad hoc committees, task forces, etc.)
2) Leadership/membership in Department accreditation efforts
3) Development of new courses or programs for the Department
4) Program coordination and/or service (e.g., student interviews, development of student learning outcomes, administration, etc.)
5) Mentoring of students, tenure-line faculty, lecturers and/or Supervisors
6) Collaboration with colleagues within the Department and across the University

b. Evidence of Service to the CSU System and/or University may include, but is not limited to:

1) Innovative leadership initiatives at the university or CSU system level
2) Leadership/membership in groups that carry on the business of the university (e.g. committees [elected or appointed], ad hoc committees, task forces, etc.)
3) University professional activities, (e.g. service toward university accreditation, etc.)
4) Act as an advisor for a student organization
5) Commencement marshal
6) Mentoring of students, tenure-line and full-time faculty, part-time/adjunct lecturers and/or Clinical Supervisors

3. External Service Activities

a. Evidence of Service to the Profession may include, but is not limited to:

1) Peer reviewer for journal or conference proposals
2) Membership on Editorial Board for peer reviewed/refereed journal or publication
3) Leadership in professional organizations as an officer, on a committee or task force, etc.
4) Consultation and expert services
5) Providing continuing education for community

b. Evidence of Service to the Greater Community may include, but is not limited to:

1) Assist agencies and/or community organizations (e.g., interview committee for a school principal, interview panelist, grant or award application, textbook adoption committee, etc.)
2) Development of speech clinics in collaboration with community partners to provide services to community members
3) Consulting (paid or unpaid) with external agencies, (e.g. presenting professional development sessions, conducting research for a school or hospital, etc.)

4. Service Awards and Special Recognition

C. Evaluation of Service
1. General Standards

 Candidates will be assessed on the evidence of the quality of evidence provided, the evidence of sustained service, and the totality of their work.  When judged as a group, no one indicator may be used to determine the overall rating of service activity.  Faculty must provide documentation of their service as part of their WPAF.  Such documentation may include a reflective summary of their performance and role on the committee including actions that the faculty member was involved in.

2. Tenure and/or Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor
Candidates for promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor must provide evidence of effective sustained internal and external service contributions.

3. Tenure and/or Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor
Candidates for promotion from Associate Professor to Professor must provide evidence of leadership in one or more service activities in addition to demonstrating sustained active participation in both internal and external service activities.

4. Retention
Candidates for retention must provide appropriate and effective evidence of significant internal service.  While not required, external service contribution will be considered in the evaluation.

VII. Definitions of Terms and Abbreviations

For definitions of terms and abbreviations see the CEHHS and University Retention, Tenure and Promotion documents.