TTU Home Department of Psychology Home

Faculty Policy Manual


Policy and Procedures Manual
Issues Pertaining to Faculty
Texas Tech University
Department of Psychology
August, 2004

MISSION STATEMENT

The Department of Psychology is committed to excellent teaching, nationally recognized research, and outstanding service to the university, profession, and community.

VISION STATEMENT

The Department of Psychology aspires to the highest standards of excellence in teaching, research, and service, while striving to become a more inclusive and diverse academic community that respects differences among individuals. We strive to have the top undergraduate psychology program in the region, nationally-recognized graduate programs, nationally-recognized faculty research and scholarship, and an outstanding record of service to the university, profession, and community.

CORE VALUES

The Department of Psychology is committed to the core values of:

Excellence—includes the values of outstanding performance across the areas of teaching, research, and service

Teaching—includes the values of outstanding teaching and creative leadership in all areas of student interaction, including instruction, supervision, and research

Students—includes the values of a love of learning, collegiality, diversity, ethics, integrity, professionalism, respect, and responsiveness to the needs of students

Education—includes the values of critical thinking, effective communication, knowledge of the science of human behavior (psychology), creativity, and cultural and technical literacy

Research—includes the values of advancing knowledge, contributing creatively to scholarship, maintaining the strongest methodological procedures in our investigations, and following the highest standards of protection for our research participants

Service—includes the values of altruism, generous and effective service at all levels, and pro bono service in our areas of expertise

Community—includes the values of respect for individual and cultural diversity, human rights, professional ethics and standards, university policies, and the traditions of higher education

Freedom—includes the values of academic freedom, due process, legal protections, and shared governance.

Evaluation

Tenure And Promotion Review Procedures

(Adopted by the Psychology Faculty, 1998; Revised January 2008; April 2013)


(1) Faculty in the Department of Psychology attempt to carefully follow the tenure and promotion procedures of University OP 32.01 and of the College of Arts and Sciences.

(2) Expectations of the Department of Psychology for tenure-track faculty are similar to those of the College of Arts and Sciences: "There should be no question that all faculty should teach well and counsel students. Each person is expected to keep abreast of his or her discipline through research, publication or creative activity, and attendance at scholarly meetings. Acceptable professional relations should also be developed with colleagues. As the person's tenure-acquiring period as a faculty member proceeds, membership on committees at various levels, together with other types of service, will be expected." [Quoted from page 1 of the College of Arts and Sciences Procedures for the Review of Untenured Faculty, 9/16/91 edition.]

(3) Each spring semester, the department chair provides relevant information to faculty who will be reviewed for tenure or promotion the following fall.

(4) During the summer, the department chair appoints a three-member faculty review committee. Candidates are invited to make suggestions for committee membership, but final decisions on this remain with the department chair. The review committee members are department faculty of at least the rank to which the candidate aspires. A long-standing department custom has also limited membership on these committees to full-time, tenured faculty. Efforts are made to have representatives on the committee from at least two of the three graduate training areas in the department (i.e., clinical, counseling, and experimental psychology). The committee chair usually, but not always, comes from the same graduate training area as the candidate.

(5) During the summer, the review committee and the candidate develop separate lists of possible outside references. An effort is made to identify potential references with outstanding research reputations in the candidate's field and preferably at peer-aspirant universities, and also individuals who do not have a close personal relationship with the candidate. The department chair selects several names from the list prepared by the candidate and several names from the list prepared by the review committee, and then the department chair invites these individuals to serve as outside reviewers. Those that agree to do so are sent relevant dossier materials in the summer and asked to get their evaluation letters to the department chair by late September. An effort is made to obtain six outside evaluations. These evaluations are later made available to the faculty and they become part of the official dossier.

(6) The department chair and the review committee will help the candidate prepare the final dossier in accordance with O.P. 32.01 and the College of Arts & Sciences Format Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure Dossiers (copies will be provided to the candidate and review committee chair), which will include copies of syllabi and selected reprints in the appendices. The review committee also prepares a written report, which summarizes their evaluation of the candidate. Candidates will be provided the opportunity to respond in writing to the review committee report. The candidate’s response will be distributed with the review committee report to all tenured faculty members.

(7) In the early part of the fall semester, eligible faculty voters have an opportunity to review the candidate's dossier. The criteria for eligible faculty voters for tenure are full-time appointment in the department and tenure in the department. The criteria for eligible faculty voters for promotion are full-time appointment in the department and attainment of at least the rank to which the candidate aspires. A meeting of the eligible faculty voters is held in early October to discuss the matter and to study other relevant materials, such as the outside letters of evaluation and the review committee's report. Voting occurs within the next two days, with a written ballot (including anonymous comments), and a double-envelope procedure used to ensure that only eligible faculty vote but that their individual votes are anonymous. Votes are counted by the department chair and two faculty witnesses from the group of eligible voters. The department chair does not vote at this level, but rather makes a separate recommendation that is communicated to the candidate and the dean.

(8) The confidentiality guidelines of the OP are followed carefully. Thus, the candidate sees everything in the dossier before it is sent forward to the dean. The candidate is informed of the total number of eligible faculty who voted approval, disapproval, and abstention; but how individual faculty voted remains confidential. However, the candidate does see the department chair's evaluation and recommendation. In addition, the candidate is given a photocopy of their dossier.

(9) As per the OP, candidates can withdraw their application at this point, if they wish to do so and if they request this in writing to the department chair.

(10) The department chair is responsible for seeing that the dossier is forwarded to the dean on time and with the correct contents. Throughout this process, the department chair is available to the candidate and the review committee for advice on matters of style, substance, and procedure.

Return to the Table of Contents

 

TENURE AND PROMOTION STANDARDS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY

(Established 1995; Revised, May 1999; January 2001; March 2013)

The Department of Psychology supports and works within the tenure/promotion standards of the College and University. These standards are published and readily available (College of Arts and Sciences Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion and Texas Tech University OP Manual).

This statement summarizes the Department of Psychology Standards. The Department of Psychology has a separate statement that summarizes Procedures (Psychology Department Tenure and Promotion Review Procedures).

NOTE: Consistent With OP32.01, “The implementation of the guidelines will be effective fall 2012. Faculty hired prior to the approval of this document may choose to use either the guidelines outlined in this document, or those guidelines in effect when the candidate was hired (if being considered for promotion to associate professor and/or tenure), or those guidelines in effect when the candidate was last promoted (if being considered for promotion to professor” [OP32.01, P.6].

Tenure:

The Department of Psychology expects successful candidates for tenure to evidence at least satisfactory performance in all domains that are evaluated: teaching, research, and service. In addition, successful candidates for tenure should maintain acceptable professional relations with colleagues, staff, and students across the domains of teaching, research, and service.

(1)Teaching: Successful candidates for tenure should be effective teachers. In addition, they should demonstrate effective instruction and advising at both undergraduate and graduate levels. It is obvious why good teaching is essential, and effective academic advising is necessary to help students pursue curricular and career options in the best possible way. The huge undergraduate and doctoral programs in the Department of Psychology necessitate these standards, thereby allowing the department's instructional mission to be met. Evidence will include evaluations of teaching by students and peers, direct observation of teaching by peers, course outlines, and other relevant information provided by candidates, peers, students, or administrators (e.g., invited letters from former students and quality of student research supervision). Evidence will be calibrated by the individual circumstances of the candidate and the courses taught. For instance, it is easier to get good teacher evaluations in some courses than in others, in some class sizes than in others, and so on. Evidence that the tenure candidate shows promise of becoming a superior teacher is preferred.

Successful candidates should have demonstrated a record of significant contributions to the department’s graduate programs through such activities as teaching graduate courses; serving on qualifying, second-year project, and dissertation committees; or supervising graduate student research.

(2)Research: Successful candidates for tenure should be effective scholars. The nature of psychology and of science in general do not allow for rigid standards here in terms of numbers, specific journals, and so forth. However, some guidelines are possible: [a] Refereed Journals: Successful candidates for tenure should have publications in refereed journals. First-authored, empirical publications in elite journals, based on work conducted at Texas Tech, are highly valued. Review and theoretical articles in well-regarded journals are also highly valued. Journal articles (and other publications and presentations), based on work conducted elsewhere, are valued but are not weighed as heavily as articles based on work conducted here. [b] Grant Proposals: Successful candidates for tenure should have applied for external funding and been successful in a manner consistent with their appointment letters. Proposal submissions for extramural research funding are highly valued. [c] Books and Book Chapters: These are highly valued, especially if there is evidence of careful peer review and positive evaluation by outside experts. [d] Convention Presentations: These are valued, especially if there is evidence of careful peer review. [e] Quality versus Quantity: Quality is more important than quantity (e.g., articles in high-prestige journals are more valued than articles in low-prestige journals). [f] Citation Rates: This information on the citation rates of the candidate's own work can help establish the impact of the candidate's scholarship. [g] Evaluations from Outside Experts: Evaluators will be asked to comment on the candidate's professional and scholarly contributions. The majority of these evaluations should be favorable. [h] Other Relevant Data: Additional relevant information provided by candidates, colleagues, students, and administrators will be considered. For example, review committees will consider unusual teaching or administrative demands that would clearly have affected a candidate's research program. Evidence that the tenure candidate shows promise of becoming a superior scholar is preferred.

(3)Service: Tenure candidates will be expected to provide some service every year that they are here, and progressively more service as time goes on. A standard example is service on administrative committees. If a tenure candidate has carried an unusually demanding service assignment (e.g., Executive Committee assignment), then review committees will take this into account, but effective teaching and scholarship will still be expected.

Promotion:

Assistant Professor: Faculty candidates hired or promoted to assistant professor should have the terminal degree (PhD) in psychology. They should also evidence clear potential for effectiveness in teaching, research and service, as well as for department citizenship.

Associate Professor: Faculty candidates hired or promoted to associate professor should meet the standards described previously for tenure. These are:

(1)Teaching: Successful candidates for Associate Professor should be effective teachers. In addition, they should demonstrate effective instruction and advising at both undergraduate and graduate levels. It is obvious why good teaching is essential, and effective academic advising is necessary to help students pursue curricular and career options in the best possible way. The huge undergraduate and doctoral programs in the Department of Psychology necessitate these standards, thereby allowing the department's instructional mission to be met. Evidence will include evaluations of teaching by students and peers, direct observation of teaching by peers, course outlines, and other relevant information provided by candidates, peers, students, or administrators (e.g., invited letters from former students and quality of student research supervision). Evidence will be calibrated by the individual circumstances of the candidate and the courses taught. For instance, it is easier to get good teacher evaluations in some courses than in others, in some class sizes than in others, and so on. Evidence that the Associate Professor candidate shows promise of becoming a superior teacher is preferred.

Successful candidates should have demonstrated a record of significant contributions to the department’s graduate programs through such activities as teaching graduate courses; serving on qualifying, second-year project, and dissertation committees; or supervising graduate student research.

(2)Research: Successful candidates for Associate Professor should be effective scholars. The nature of psychology and of science in general do not allow for rigid standards here in terms of numbers, specific journals, and so forth. However, some guidelines are possible: [a] Refereed Journals: Successful candidates for Associate Professor should have publications in refereed journals. First-authored, empirical publications in elite journals, based on work conducted at Texas Tech, are highly valued. Review and theoretical articles in well-regarded journals are also highly valued. Journal articles (and other publications and presentations), based on work conducted elsewhere, are valued but are not weighed as heavily as articles based on work conducted here. [b] Grant Proposals: Successful candidates for promotion to Associate Professor should have applied for external funding and been successful in a manner consistent with their appointment letters. Proposal submissions for extramural research funding are highly valued. [c] Books and Book Chapters: These are highly valued, especially if there is evidence of careful peer review and positive evaluation by outside experts. [d] Convention Presentations: These are valued, especially if there is evidence of careful peer review. [e] Quality versus Quantity: Quality is more important than quantity (e.g., articles in high-prestige journals are more valued than articles in low-prestige journals). [f] Citation Rates: This information on the citation rates of the candidate's own work can help establish the impact of the candidate's scholarship. [g] Evaluations from Outside Experts: Evaluators will be asked to comment on the candidate's professional and scholarly contributions. The majority of these evaluations should be favorable. [h] Other Relevant Data: Additional relevant information provided by candidates, colleagues, students, and administrators will be considered. For example, review committees will consider unusual teaching or administrative demands that would clearly have affected a candidate's research program. Evidence that the Associate Professor candidate shows promise of becoming a superior scholar is preferred.

(3)Service: Associate Professor candidates will be expected to provide some service every year that they are here, and progressively more service as time goes on. A standard example is service on administrative committees. If an Associate Professor candidate has carried an unusually demanding service assignment (e.g., Executive Committee assignment), then review committees will take this into account, but effective teaching and scholarship will still be expected.

Professor: The department supports and utilizes the relevant OP statement: “For promotion to the highest academic rank, the candidate’s academic achievement and professional reputation must be superior and should have resulted in national or international recognition, which may include outreach and engagement. The candidate is expected to demonstrate a clear and continuing record of significant involvement with undergraduate and/or graduate students in his/her research, scholarship and creative activity, as well as the support of students as appropriate within the candidate’s discipline or field of study. This rank can be earned only by a candidate who has demonstrated continued growth in, and has a cumulative record of, teaching effectiveness, substantial peer-reviewed publications [or creative activities, deleted for Department of Psychology Standards], which are supported by extramural funding in the form of fellowships, grants, and similar kinds of support appropriate in type and scope to the candidate’s discipline or field of study; and contributions to the university and professional service” [OP 32.01, p.5]. The department will use the dimensions of evaluation noted previously for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor in these Psychology Department Standards.

Third-Year Review Procedures

Third year review of all tenure-track faculty will take place during the second semester of the faculty members’ third year. The Department Chair will inform faculty members that they will be reviewed in September of each year. The review will take place during February of the academic year. Five copies of the following materials will be due in mid-January:


• Self-statement for teaching, research, and service (1 page each)

• Basic Information from tenure dossier format

• Updated vita

• Summary of teacher evaluations at Texas Tech

• Copies of syllabi

• Two sample reprints or preprints

• Annual reports for 3 years

• All available yearly chair’s evaluations

• Any other relevant information

Faculty review committees consist 3 persons are appointed by the Department Chair. They will consist of tenured representatives from at least two of the three doctoral training programs in the department, including the candidate's home program. The Department Chair will accept recommendations from the faculty member being reviewed, but the Department Chair makes final decisions on who to appoint. During spring semester, review committee members should observe one of the candidate's lectures following an invitation from the candidate. In addition, review committee members should have access to raw teacher evaluations.

Review committees prepare a short, written report. The candidate should receive a copy, and have an opportunity to respond to it, if he or she wishes. All tenured faculty members have access to the materials described above, the written report, and the candidate's response to it. Tenured faculty meet in mid-February to discuss the review, and then vote by secret ballot on whether the candidate is making at least satisfactory progress. If a majority of the voters believe that the candidate is making satisfactory progress that ends the vote. If a majority of the voters indicate that the candidate is not making satisfactory progress, there is a second vote on whether a terminal contract should be issued. If a majority of the voters recommend a terminal contract, termination of employment is recommended to the Dean. If a majority do not recommend a terminal contract, the Department Chair will provide a specific set of written recommendations setting forth the conditions for continued employment and the deadlines for completing the conditions. (Majority is based on the total votes, eliminating abstentions, which simply do not enter into the count.) The Department Chair votes separately and prepares a letter to the Dean that summarizes the Chair's evaluation and vote, and summarizes the faculty’s evaluation and vote. The Department Chair and faculty votes are advisory to the Dean who makes the final decision about continuance or offering a terminal contract. The Chair’s letter, summary of the faculty votes (signed by the Department Chair and two witnesses who count the ballots), the ballot comments, the review committee report, the candidate's response to the review committee report (if there is a response), the candidate's self-statements, and the candidate’s vitae become part of his or her permanent file in the department. The Chair’s letter, committee report, candidate's self-statements and vitae later become part of the candidate's tenure dossier.

Procedures for Comprehensive Performance Evaluation (CPE)

(Approved unanimously by the Psychology Faculty, Dec. 8, 1998;

Revision approved, May, 1999)

Goal of Comprehensive Performance Evaluation (CPE)

The Psychology Department's Comprehensive Performance Evaluation will be based primarily on competence in teaching, professional activity, and departmental and university service. The goal is not to determine whether a faculty member meets the current guidelines for the award of tenure. The evaluation should take into account changes in research emphasis, shifting of effort among the three areas of teaching, research, and service (including consulting and other outside activities), conduct of administrative duties, and other changes that might occur over the course of an academic career. Incompetence is reflected in a long-term pattern of behavior, not the product a short-term lapse in professional activity, teaching effectiveness, or other short-term variations in performance.

CPE Groups

Tenured faculty will be divided into CPE Groups of 4-5 individuals so that there are 4 groups. Each group will represent all program areas, and there will be a mix of Associate and Full Professors in the groups. Each group will both evaluate other faculty and be evaluated across each four-year period.

Groups will be formed by the Departmental Chairperson and groups will be randomly assigned letters A, B, C, and D. As individuals become tenured, they will be assigned by the Chairperson to a review group that is inactive during the year in which they are tenured.

CPE Group Schedule for first four-year period

For the first round of reviews, the review calendar will be as follows:

Group being Reviewed Peer Evaluation Committee CPE Inform Date CPE Begins CPE Completed
A D 9/1/99 2/1/00 3/15/00
B A 9/1/00 2/1/01 3/15/01
C B 9/1/01 2/1/02 3/15/02
D C 9/1/02 2/1/03 3/15/03

Each year the eligible faculty, including the group being reviewed, will formally approve the peer evaluation group members for the year.

If a member of the peer evaluation committee has a conflict of interest with an individual under evaluation, the member should recuse himself or herself from evaluating that person. If a member of the group being reviewed has an objection to a specific member of the Peer Evaluation Committee, the individual undergoing CPE can request that the Department Chairperson evaluate the potential for a conflict of interest. If the Department Chairperson determines that there is a conflict of interest, the Chairperson should ask the Peer Evaluation Committee member to recuse himself or herself from evaluating the individual with whom a conflict of interest exists. The Peer Evaluation Committee member will remain on the committee that year and evaluate the other individuals from the group.

The Peer Evaluation Committee will elect a chair each year. This chair will be responsible for ensuring that the evaluation is thorough and is completed by the deadline.

The Departmental Chairperson will make the Unit Administrator's decision and inform the faculty members being reviewed of the outcome by April 1 each year.

Procedures For Subsequent 6-Year Cycles

The procedures described for the first round of review will be continued for subsequent reviews. The review groups will remain the same, although changes will inevitably occur as individuals are tenured, retire, or leave the University. Reviews will always be completed over a period of 4 years. The next round of reviews will begin in September of 2005 and be completed by April of 2009.

Materials Presented to the Peer Evaluation Committee

Faculty members being evaluated should present a standard up-to-date vita including information on education, teaching, research, professional activity, and service to the Department Chair.

The Department Chair will compile copies of the annual reports and the Departmental Chair's evaluations for the previous 6 years.

These materials will be copied and distributed by the Department Chair to Peer Evaluation Committee members.

Inclusion of other material is discouraged, although, in accordance with the Arts and Sciences Guidelines for Comprehensive Performance Evaluation, it is permissible. Obtaining letters from outside evaluators is highly discouraged unless there are special circumstances, as determined by the Peer Evaluation Committee, that warrant this.

If the Peer Evaluation Committee has reason to question an individual's competency, they may request additional materials, including, but not limited to, course evaluations and students' comments; letters from students and peers; and copies of reprints, preprints, and grant proposals.

Outcome of the Comprehensive Performance Evaluation

The Peer Evaluation Committee will vote to find an individual competent or incompetent. Ideally, they should reach consensus on this decision, but, if not, the majority will rule. If there is a tie vote in the Peer Evaluation Committee, the decision will be "Competent." Members of the Peer Evaluation Committee who disagree with the final decision should forward a minority report to the Department Chairperson. In the case of a split vote, members of the Peer Evaluation Committee who agree with the decision may also submit a report to the Department Chairperson.

In the case of a decision of incompetence, the Chair of the Peer Evaluation Committee will submit a report outlining the causes for the decision to the Departmental Chairperson.

The Chair of the Peer Evaluation Committee will fill out the "Unit Peer Evaluation Committee" section on the Comprehensive Performance Evaluation Form and forward it to the Departmental Chairperson by March 15.

Faculty Performance Improvement Program

If a faculty member's performance is found to be incompetent, the Department Chairperson and the Dean or Arts and Sciences will develop a plan and a timetable for improvement with the faculty member. The Department Chairperson will seek input from the Peer Evaluation Committee on recommended content of this plan. The performance improvement program will be focused on improvement. It will be negotiated with the Departmental Chairperson and the Dean of Arts and Sciences.

Appeal of Peer Review Committee's Decision

A faculty member may attach a statement challenging the findings of the evaluation whether or not he or she appeals the judgment. This statement may include whatever information the faculty member wishes to include.

If an individual is found to be incompetent by a Peer Review Committee and by the Department Chairperson, the individual may request that another Peer Review Committee evaluate his or her performance. A written request for an appeal will be due in the Department Chairperson's office by April 8 of each year. Upon receipt of a written request for an appeal, the Department Chairperson will appoint the next year's Peer Evaluation Committee as a CPE Appeals Committee. They will elect a chairperson for the appeal. Committee members will examine the materials provided by the faculty member and the Peer Review Committee and may ask the faculty member being evaluated to provide additional information. The CPE Appeals Committee will submit their judgment of competence or incompetence to the Department Chairperson by April 25. The Chair of the Peer Evaluation Committee will fill out the "Unit Peer Evaluation Committee" section on the Comprehensive Performance Evaluation Form and forward it to the Departmental Chairperson. The names of members of the Appeals Committee will be forwarded to the Dean of Arts and Sciences as the Unit Peer Evaluation Committee and their judgment will be forwarded as the judgment for the individual. The earlier findings and report from the original Peer Evaluation Committee will also be forwarded to the Dean of Arts and Sciences.

Faculty may also challenge a finding of incompetent performance through the university grievance procedures.

If the Dean of Arts and Sciences also finds incompetent performance, the faculty member may follow the procedures specified in Section VII of the Texas Tech University Tenure Policy.

Procedures for Annual Evaluations

(Approved by the faculty, March 20, 2001)

Each faculty member will submit an Annual Report describing teaching, research, and service for the calendar year. Such reports will be submitted to the Department Chair in January by a date set by the Department Chair each year. As described in our merit raise procedures, the Chair will provide copies of these Annual Reports to members of the Executive Committee (consisting of the Associate Chair, Director of the Clinical Program, Director of the Counseling Program, Director of the Experimental Program, and the Director of Graduate Programs). Each Executive Committee member will rate each faculty member on teaching, research, and service. The Department Chair will make use of these ratings in determining annual raises.

The Department Chair will use the Annual Report to write an evaluation of each faculty member’s teaching, research, and service. Each faculty member will receive a copy of the annual evaluation to sign indicating that he/she has read the evaluation (but not necessarily that he/she agrees with it). If a faculty member has a disagreement with the Department Chair about the content of the annual evaluation, the faculty member shall first meet with the Department Chair to try to resolve the disagreement. If that is not successful, he/she may request that the most recent Comprehensive Performance Review Peer Evaluation Committee (minus the concerned faculty member if he/she is on the committee) mediate this disagreement. If the mediation is not successful, a copy of the committee’s recommendation shall be part of the annual evaluation. If the faculty member is not satisfied by the outcome of this process, he/she may file a formal grievance following the University’s Faculty Grievance Procedures.

If a faculty member’s evaluation reflects a pattern of incompetent performance, continuing or repeated substantial neglect of professional responsibilities, or other good cause as agreed upon by the Dean or Arts and Sciences and the Department Chair, the faculty member will be informed in writing about the need for a development program to improve the deficiency. The faculty member and the Department Chair will formulate a development plan that will last no longer than two years. If the faculty member wishes, he/she may request the involvement of the most recent Comprehensive Performance Review Peer Evaluation Committee in the formulation of a development plan.

Procedures for Determining Merit Raises

Allocation of time/effort on Annual Reports

On each year's Annual Report, faculty members will allocate their percent effort to teaching, research, and service. The standard allocation is 40% teaching, 40% research, and 20% service. Faculty members will give this standard as their allocation, or they will deviate from it with justification. For example, program directors, spend more time on service; individuals who have bought out courses with release time money spend more time on research; new faculty spend more time on teaching and little on service. Any deviation from the standard must be approved by the Department Chair.

Each year the Department of Psychology Merit Committee will be appointed by the department chair. It will consist of the Directors (or Acting Directors) of the Counseling, Clinical, and Experimental Programs, plus four members selected from the faculty at large. These 7 individuals should be representative in terms of program and rank. The four “at-large” members must either be tenured or have been at Texas Tech for 3 years before serving. They will serve a one-year term.

When faculty members turn in their Annual Reports, the Chair will make them available for check-out by any faculty member who is interested in looking at them. The Merit Raise Committee will examine each Annual Report carefully and rate all faculty members (except themselves and spouses or partners) giving separate ratings for Teaching, Research, and Service. The Chair will ensure that the ratings are collected in such a way that allows them to be anonymous. The Department Chair will also rate each person. The EC ratings and the Chair's ratings will be combined, giving substantial weight (at least ½) to the Merit Raise Committee’s ratings. Each time that raises are available, they will determined based on a running average of the last three years of average ratings.

The allocation of effort and the ratings will be used in determining merit raises by weighting teaching, research, and service according to percent effort. This scheme allows each person to develop his/her own job description and then to be evaluated on that agreed-upon description.

Adjunct Faculty

The Associate Chair will coordinate the review of all new applicants for Adjunct Faculty status and for renewal of Adjunct Faculty status every 3 years. Adjunct Faculty should make some contribution to the department in terms of research collaboration, teaching, or supervision of students. The Associate Chair will make the vita of Adjunct Faculty to available to all tenured and tenure-track faculty who will vote on continuation of Adjunct Faculty status. Individuals who receive a positive vote from 2/3 of the tenured and tenure-track faculty (with abstentions not entering into the count) will receive or retain Adjunct Faculty status.

Review of Graduate Faculty

New Graduate Faculty

The Department Chair will ensure that new faculty are put forward for Graduate Faculty status. When new faculty are hired into tenure-track positions, the "acceptability" vote will be used as the Peer Evaluation Vote in the Application for Graduate Faculty Status. When new faculty are hired into Visiting positions, the Executive Committee will vote on their acceptability as Graduate Faculty members with a positive vote of 2/3 of the Executive Committee necessary to recommend Graduate Faculty status.

New Adjunct Graduate Faculty

When adjunct faculty apply for Graduate Faculty status for the first time, the Associate Chair will make their vita available to the department's tenured and tenure-track Graduate Faculty. They will discuss applications in a faculty meeting and vote by secret ballot on whether to recommend Graduate Faculty status. A 2/3 positive vote will be necessary for Graduate Faculty status of an adjunct faculty member.

Current Graduate Faculty

The Executive Committee of the Psychology Department shall review present Graduate Faculty for renewal of Graduate Faculty status every 6 years. A positive recommendation needs a 2/3 positive vote. Faculty members who are not on the graduate faculty will be nominated for provisional status if their research record provides evidence that they are likely to meet the departmental criteria in the next review cycle after reinstatement.

The Criteria for Graduate Faculty are:


• Terminal Degree. The Ph.D. earned in a department of psychology or appropriate closely related discipline
• Scholarly production. A minimum of five research publications during the six years immediately preceding review. These publications must include some journal articles in fully refereed nationally recognized journal outlets.
For faculty who may be quantitatively marginal in meeting the publications criterion, additional factors may be weighed as modifiers, but may not compensate for a total lack of publications. These include:
(1) Presentation of research papers at scientific meetings if they do not cover the same research as the publications used in meeting the criterion and if the society sponsoring the meeting rejects some of the papers submitted.
(2) Scope of publications (e.g., a monograph would be weighed heavier than an article).
(3) Obtaining external (non-University) research funds
(4) Service as a reviewing editor or ad hoc reviewer for a scientific journal
(5) Publication of one or more dissertations and/or theses supervised during the six years immediately preceding review in journals of the quality acceptable under scholarly production as listed above.
All the modifiers listed under scholarly production may be applied in quantitatively marginal cases
• Successful experience in the teaching, counseling, and/or direction of students at the graduate level.
Return to the Table of Contents

Recruiting of New Faculty

Search Committees, appointed by the Department Chair, will consist of at least 3 members, typically with at least two of the three graduate programs represented. Normally, there will be one Search Committee for each position, but in cases where similar faculty members are being recruited, a single Search Committee may be appointed for multiple positions. The Department Chair will appoint a Chairperson of the Search Committee. The Search Committee Chair should visit with the Assistant or Associate Provost who oversees faculty recruiting. During this visit, the Search Committee Chair will receive a position number and instructions about how to ensure that equal opportunity requirements are met. Ads should be prepared by the Search Committee and submitted to appropriate outlets, such as the APA Monitor and the APS Observer. Normally, ads must be received by the publications in the beginning of the month prior to the month when they will be published. Ads should be as concise as possible because we are charged by the word.

When applications are received, the Search Committee Chair should ensure that postcards obtained from the Equal Opportunity Office (with the Position Vacancy # filled in) are sent to each candidate. The Search Committee Chair should make arrangements to log all incoming applications. The entire faculty should be kept abreast of the progress of the search, and they should be encouraged to look at incoming applications. After the position has closed (or the date for application review has come), the Search Committee should select a short-list of applicants, approximately twice the number to be interviewed. This list should be made known to the faculty who should be invited to study the applications and give input to the Search Committee. Using this faculty feedback, the Search Committee should select the candidates to invite for interviews.

Search Committee members should set up interviews, encouraging the candidates to use the cheapest airline fares available. The Committee member setting up the interview should ensure that hotel reservations have been made (the Psychology Business Manager can help) and that transportation, meetings, and meal hosts have been arranged. All candidates should speak with the Department Chair, the Program Director, with groups of faculty, and with groups of students. In addition, some candidates may wish to speak with the Clinic Director, individuals from the Health Sciences Center, other departments on campus, or individuals from the community. Candidates should give a formal colloquium. There may be a reception at someone's house.

Candidates should be asked to pay for their own airfare and meals, to be reimbursed later when original receipts are received by the department. Candidates should give their social security number to the Business Manager and fill out a travel summary while they are here. Hotels will usually send bills directly to the department.

The tenured and tenure-track Psychology Faculty as a whole will decide who to hire usually after all candidates for a specific position have been interviewed. A quorum of 51% of the voting faculty must be present at meetings during which hiring decisions are made. The Search Committee will give a recommendation that will be followed by discussion. Voting will take place in two phases. First, full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty will vote on the acceptability of a candidate. Candidates who receive a 2/3 majority on acceptability (not counting abstentions in the total) will be rank ordered for offers. With the approval of the Dean of Arts and Sciences, the Department Chair will make offers to the candidates in the order prescribed by the faculty.

Following University policy, the Search Committee Chair will file an interim report after the position has closed and a final report after the position is filled (or the search ends unsuccessfully). Copies of these reports should be given to the Department Chair.

Teaching

Teaching Load

The standard teaching load for Graduate Faculty in the Psychology Department is two organized courses per semester. Each faculty member must have a workload of 18 semester credits per year. Each undergraduate course counts 3.0 credits (with variation for larger courses) and each graduate course counts 4.5 credits. The difference between course load and workload is made up by enrollments in 4000, 5001, 6000, 7000, and 8000. The workload weightings vary for these different teaching activities. The complete policy can be seen in Texas Tech's Operating Policy and Procedure Manual (OP 32.18). The Department Chair will ensure that each faculty member meets the required University workload. The load for non-Graduate Faculty is 4 organized courses per semester. The minimum allowable enrollment for organized courses is 10 for undergraduate courses and 5 for graduate courses.

In the Fall of each year, faculty members will make their desired course assignments for the following academic year known to their program director. Program directors will compile a schedule of courses to be taught for their area. These schedules will be given to the Associate Chair who will compile a departmental schedule, ensuring the scheduling of all courses that should be taught. Final teaching assignments are approved by the Department Chair.

Class Meetings

Faculty are responsible for meeting their classes on time for the full class period every scheduled class day (including the first day of classes). If a faculty member cannot meet a class, he or she should arrange for appropriate coverage, or exercise reasonable judgments in rescheduling if an emergency makes it impossible to arrange for coverage.

Return to the Table of Contents

Office Hours

All faculty members are required to hold regularly scheduled office hours. They should post these office hours outside their offices each semester and make their office hours known to the departmental secretaries. At least three office hours per week are recommended.

Syllabi

Per College policy, faculty members should prepare a syllabus for each course that includes an explanation of how the final course grade will be determined. Final Exams must be scheduled at the scheduled time as listed in the TTU Class Schedule for the semester. Each semester, syllabi should be given to the Department's Business Manager, who will keep them on file.

All syllabi should include a statement about accommodation of students with disabling conditions. The administration recommends: "Any student who, because of a disability, may require special arrangements in order to meet the course requirements should contact the instructor as soon as possible to make any necessary arrangements. Students should present appropriate verification from Student Disability Services during the instructor’s office hours. Please note instructors are not allowed to provide classroom accommodations to a student until appropriate verification from Student Disability Services has been provided. For additional information, you may contact the Student Disability Services office in 335 West Hall or 806-742-2405."

The faculty recommend that syllabi also include the following:

Academic Misconduct Statement on Course Syllabi

As stated in the Texas Tech University Statement of Academic Integrity, "Texas Tech promotes an ethical standard that does not condone academic misconduct and strives to instill values that uphold academic integrity. . . . Academic misconduct includes cheating, plagiarism, and any other activity that a student may participate in that prevents an honest representation of his or her academic performance. . . . Cheating and plagiarism are the most common forms of academic misconduct and are defined, in accordance with the Code of Student Conduct from the Student Affairs Handbook (Part IX, Section B.19)." It is your responsibility as a student to be familiar with Texas Tech's Code of Student Conduct, and policies on academic integrity and academic misconduct. These materials can be found in the Student Affairs Handbook, Part IX, and at the following web site: http://www.depts.ttu.edu/dos/handbook/

The Faculty voted (March 9, 2004) to assess five learning outcomes for undergraduate majors. These are:


• Psychology majors’ knowledge base in psychology
• Psychology majors’ knowledge of scientific methods and their ability to evaluate evidence.
• Psychology majors’ career planning and development.
• Psychology majors’ knowledge about applications of psychology.
• Psychology majors’ multicultural awareness.

Each syllabus should indicate which of these goals are desired outcomes of the course. Courses should include some assessments of the goal(s) (preferably as a pretest/posttest design). Outcome data should be reported to the chair of the department in summary form each semester.

Class/Lists and Grades on the Web

All instructors can download their own class lists through Web for Faculty. In addition, grades must be entered through this system. Instructors need to enter grades three times during the semester: at midterm (if there are athletes or freshmen in the course), before commencement (for students obtaining degrees that semester), and by noon on the Monday after commencement. There is no paper option; grades must be entered via the Web. If grades are not entered by the deadline (usually noon on the Monday after commencement), instructors will need to fill out Change of Grade forms for every student. These forms must be signed by the Department Chair before being sent to the Student Division of the college of Arts and Sciences.

Writing Intensive Courses

(Guidelines adopted by the faculty, 11/14/00)


1. Writing Intensive courses, including lab sections of courses, should enroll no more than 20 students.
2. Each class will have at least 2 writing assignments that are graded in which the student has the opportunity to revise.
3. In all writing assignments, instructors are interested in the student's original ideas, critical thinking, integration and/or synthesis, as well as content, spelling, grammar, etc.
4. At least one substantial intensive writing assignment will be completed out of class.
5. Any out of class writing assignments should be in APA format (when appropriate).
6. Issues involved in quality writing, in some form, should be communicated during the course.

Student Attendance

You may set up an attendance policy for you classes as long as the policy and consequences are reasonable and clearly defined on your syllabus. If a student is participating in an official University activity (sports event, debate, etc.) and gives you notification from a University official, you must allow the student to make up missed work. In addition, students who are absent from class for the observance of a religious holy day and gives you proper advance notice of the absence shall not be discriminated against or penalized.

Extra Credit

Extra credit in courses should be readily available to all students or to no student. Making extra credit available to selected students opens a faculty member to accusations of discrimination, to grade appeals, and to possible legal action.

Posting of grades

Texas Tech policy is that no grades should be posted by social security number at any time. However, in large classes, grades may be posted by random numbers (or other arbitrary names) if these are confidential and available to the students only. Electronic posting of grades is permissible as long as the student provides consent.

Retaining of records

Final grade records should be retained for at least four calendar years (according to the Texas Tech Faculty Handbook). This includes grade books and computerized and non-computerized grade sheets that show the scores on all of the components used in determining the grade. Instructors who leave Texas Tech must turn over current final exams and grade records to the Department Chair.

Course evaluations

Instructors will administer course evaluations in all organized courses each semester. The standard university form will be used for most courses, but alternative forms can be used for Clinical and Counseling practicum. Instructors in all courses may use whatever additional forms they wish. All evaluations (the mandatory University form plus additional forms used by an instructor) will be conducted using the following procedures:


• The instructor will not be present in the classroom while students are completing the evaluation
• The packet of evaluations will be delivered to the Psychology Department office by a student
• Instructors will not have access to the evaluations until after semester grades are turned in
• For classes of 15 students and under, instructors will not have access to the raw evaluation forms. Instead, departmental secretaries will type students' ratings and comments (and all other information from the forms). Instructors will receive a report with rating means calculated. Return to the Table of Contents

Role of Faculty Course Supervisors

Approved by the faculty (10/12/04)

Each undergraduate course that is taught by graduate students will have an assigned faculty supervisor. It is expected that Teaching Assistants (TAs) who are novice instructors will receive more supervision and guidance than more advanced Graduate Part-Time Instructors who have teaching experience. The roles of this faculty member will include the following:

• Select textbook for all sections or work with students to select appropriate textbooks
• Approve the syllabus of each TA or GPTI, paying special attention to basis for grades in the
course
• Ensure that the TA or GPTI has set up adequate office hours
• Examine some quizzes and tests used in the course
• Serve as a source of information and advice to the TAs and GPTIs
• Work with the Undergraduate Programs Committee to identify students for the Psychology Teaching Awards each year
• Observe classroom lectures as appropriate
• Review course evaluations, as appropriate

The role of faculty course supervisor should be taken seriously, and it should count as a service activity for faculty on Annual Reports.

Graduate Student Teaching Awards

Three awards will be given each year if appropriate recipients identified. The awards are to recognize superior instruction by graduate students. One of the awards will be given to instructors of introductory psychology (Psy 1300). One of the awards will be given to TA’s who have substantial direct instruction responsibilities, such as students who are instructing laboratories or serving as TAs for graduate courses. One award will be given to instructors of their own course. No student can receive the award twice in the same category. Candidates for each award will be nominated. The Undergraduate Programs Committee will evaluate evidence supporting the nomination including, but not limited to, a) the nominating letter, b) course syllabus, c) an exam, and d) student evaluations. The UPC will select semifinalists and those candidates will undergo a UPC review of a lecture. If, in the rare case, a semifinalist is not teaching, a lecture opportunity will be created. Performance on all previous instructional experiences appropriate for the particular award will be considered. The goal is to fund each of these awards at $100 and to give the awardees a plaque from the faculty.

Research

Human Participants in Research

Experimental Credit in Psychology 1300
(Approved by the faculty, October 10, 2010)

Student and faculty researchers in the Psychology Department depend upon human participants to help them conduct their research, and participation is an important educational experience that all PSY 1300 students should be offered. Thus, the instructors of ALL sections of PSY 1300—including regular sections, summer sections, honors sections, and online sections—are to require 7.5 hours of experimental credits. In accordance with the APA Ethical Guidelines, students will have a written option to complete this requirement if they choose not to participate in studies. Students may use any combination of participation and the alternative paper option (described next) to complete the 7.5 required credits. The number of required credits may be temporarily reduced by the 1300 coordinator (across all sections) within any long or summer session if the coordinator determines that an insufficient number of experiments have been offered for students to earn 7.5 credits; students who have completed more than the reduced number of credits at that point will receive extra credit for doing so. Student and faculty experimenters should debrief all human participants and give them credit via Experimetrix after completion of the study. All participants will be treated ethically as described in APA's ethical code.

Use of the Department's Human Participant Pool with Experimetrix

All faculty members and graduate students are welcome to use the PSY 1300 Human Participant Pool. Projects using human participants must first be approved by the TTU IRB. Forms for Exempt, Expedited, and Full Board Review can be obtained from the departmental secretaries. Once these forms are completely filled out, they may be given to one of two departmental IRB representatives. The IRB representative will conduct a local review, if appropriate, or forward the proposal for full IRB review.

Experimetrix is the commercial subject pool management software used by the Psychology Department. All faculty and graduate students who wish to use the subject pool must receive training in Experimetrix in order to use the subject pool.

GETTING STARTED

1. Get an experiment number and password from your administrator. Do this by completing the experimenter form in the main office. If your experiment meets in different places indicate this on the form. You will then receive a skinny form with your experiment numbers and passwords.

2. Go to the TTU Experimetrix Sign-Up Home (http//:www.experimetrix.com/ttu), and select "Experimenter Area". Your logon is the experiment number and the password is the password that the administrator gave you.

3. Select "edit header" to provide details for your experiment such as faculty supervisor, experimenter name (only graduate student or faculty), cancellation contact information (this can be any one associated with the study and should indicate if your allowed time to cancel is longer that 2 hours), location of study, and selection criteria. The following information goes in the Selection Criteria: actual criteria, cancellation time limits, number of sessions, if experiment-specific parental permission is needed, and what to bring or wear etc. The following information goes in the Description: number of credits, and if your experiment has two parts permission to sign participants up for other sessions. DO NOT PUT ANY INFORMATION IN SHORT DESCRIPTION. When finished select "Apply Changes". Then select "Experimenter Options".

ADDING TIMES

Before you can add times, you must go through all the steps for "Getting Started"

4. Select "add new times" to add sessions that people can sign up for.

5. Adjust the "Date:", "Start Time:", and "Finish Time" to the times you want participants to sign up for. If more than one person can participate at the same time put the number of participants who can sign-up at that time in the "Times To Add" box. Then select "Add New Times". For each session at a different time, you will have to add a new time.

DISPLAYING EXPERIMENT

You must add times before you can display an experiment.

6. When finished adding sign up time select "Experimenter Options" "View Schedule". From here, you can look at your current schedule. When you are ready for students to sign up check the box labeled "Display experiment to students" then select "Apply Changes".

Students can now sign up for your experiment.

ASSIGNING CREDIT

1. After the experimental session, go to the TTU Experimetrix Sign-Up Home (http//:www.experimetrix.com/ttu), and select "Experimenter Area". Put in you logon and password.

2. Select "view schedule" to award credit to the participant.

3. To award credit click in circle in front of "credit". Then select "Apply Changes". Notice that the sessions for which you have just assigned credit will disappear from the screen if "Only Show Sessions Pending Credit Assignment" is checked at the top of the page.

4. Credit must be assigned within two working days of the end of each experiment session, OR YOU RISK LOSING ACCESS TO THE 1300 SUBJECT POOL.

CANCELING A TIME

1. Scheduled time can only be canceled if no one is signed up for that time slot.

2. After the experimental session, go to the TTU Experimetrix Sign-Up Home (http//:www.experimetrix.com/ttu), and select "Experimenter Area". Put in you logon and password.

3. Select "view schedule".

4. Check the box "Remove". Then select "Apply Changes".

EXPERIMENTS THAT MEET IN MORE THAN ONE PLACE

1. If your experiment meets in more than one place, you will receive an experiment number and password for each place the experiment meets. For each place the experiment meets follow the above procedures. You will have to set eligibility so that a student cannot sign up for the same experiment in a different room.

SETTING ELIGIBILITY

1. From "Experimenter Options Page" page, select "Set eligibility".

2. Select "Add New Eligibility Requirement".

3. Select "Never Participated" and put the number of your other experiment in the "in Experiment" box.

4. Select "Apply Changes". Now a student cannot sign up for your experiment twice.

5. This will need to be done for all of the separate meeting places.

Mass Survey

The Mass Survey is used for pre-screening to identify participants who qualify for subsequent studies based on their responses to initial surveys. If space permits, surveys can be included for the purpose of collecting normative data on an instrument. When surveys intended for pre-screening fill the time allotment, surveys intended for the collection of norming data are excluded. If the demand exceeds the time allotment, surveys will be prioritized for inclusion starting with the shortest surveys and adding longer surveys one at a time in an order based on the number of items they contain until capacity has been reached. Each survey in the Mass Survey must be approved by the University's Institutional Review Board. Students who participate receive 1 hour of experimental credit. A member of the Resources, Equipment, and Space Committee will be responsible for administering the Mass Survey. That individual has a Mass Survey Manual (which is also available from the Department Chair).

Participation of Non-psych. 1300 Students in Research

(Approved by the faculty, March 8, 2005)

The following guidelines apply to all psychology courses at Texas Tech University offered by the Department of Psychology.

Because research is integral to psychology as a discipline, all psychology students should be exposed to research. The major ways such exposure occur are: (a) didactic, as in classroom instruction, (b) the student serves as an experimenter in research under faculty supervision and collects data, and (c) the student serves as a participant in the research process by engaging in a variety of activities collectively known as "providing data." These guidelines involve only (c), when students in courses serve as research participants.

(1) Participation in research is almost universal as a requirement for introductory psychology at most universities. This requirement exists for General Psychology 1300 at TTU. Students earn credit points for such participation, with alternate requirements if a student chooses not to be a research participant. Credit may be awarded only through the established procedures of the department research participation pool. Such procedures include the mass survey. No research participation of any other kind may count for course credits for Psychology 1300 students.

(2) Though the Department has the privilege of a relatively large Introductory Psychology participant pool, researchers would benefit from an even larger participant pool. As a result, researchers often turn to advanced psychology courses (i.e., 2000 level courses and above), where instructors offer regular course credit or extra course credit for participating in their own or other researchers’ studies. Though researchers benefit from an expanded participant pool, it costs students in terms of time spent learning about course material more directly through lecture, discussion, etc. Thus, extending the participant pool to advanced psychology courses is only permissible if the research is of pedagogical value to the student. To be of pedagogical value, the research must (a) be of demonstrable relevance to the course (e.g., a study on interpersonal relationships would be appropriate for an interpersonal relationships or social psychology course, but not for a perception course), and (b) be followed by an extended discussion of the research that is more extensive than the typical debriefing. Such discussions might focus on prior theory and research that motivated the study, the researcher’s predictions, and/or potential implications of the findings for theory, research and practice. These guidelines also benefit instructors by maintaining the instructor’s credibility in the eyes of the students. After all, the credible instructor is the instructor who reserves class time exclusively for activities that are relevant to the course and of pedagogical value. With these guidelines in mind, instructors may use class time for courses other than 1300 for collecting data for research (as defined by the IRB) under the following conditions.

(A) The syllabus must state that students may be asked to serve as research participants.

(B) The research must have a demonstrable educational purpose suitable to the content of that particular course.

(C) If a student objects to his/her data being used for research, those data must be excluded from the dataset, and may contribute only to the educational purpose of the study for the student.

(D) Use of class time for research purposes should be limited to three hours. Note that classroom demonstrations intended to replicate classic research findings do not constitute research. No data may be collected for research purposes during such demonstrations.

(E) No extra credit may be awarded for the in-class research sessions.

(3) If an instructor allows extra credit assignments, as defined in the syllabus, such extra credit may include (but not be restricted to) participation in research conducted outside of class. Such research must be demonstrably related to the subject matter of the course, regardless of where data collection occurs. Extra credit earned by participation in research should be proportionate in time and effort to extra credit earned in other ways. Alternatives for extra credit that are comparable in time and effort must be made available.

(4) When the instructor has an interest in research conducted either in class or for extra credit outside of class, special care must be taken to avoid any appearance of coercion. In general, instructors should avoid use of their own courses for research purposes other than for hypothesis generation, item development, discussion of proposed methods with the class, etc. In brief, helping the instructor originate a research plan would become part of the educational experience of the course, as appropriate to the content of the course.

Psychology 1300 Research and Testing Participant Pool Policies and Procedures

LAST UPDATED April, 12, 2011
(Approved by the faculty, October 10, 2010)

Section 1: Purpose of the Participant Pool

The Psychology 1300 Research and Testing Participant Pool has two main purposes. The first purpose is to provide students in this course the opportunity to learn about research and testing in psychology. This type of hands-on experience can be useful in increasing students’ understanding of research and testing methods and issues. The student participants can earn course credit for their participation. Their participation is voluntary and there are other, non-research ways, involving comparable time and effort, in which the students can earn these credits, and which also are designed to expose students to research issues. The second purpose is to provide researchers and psychologists in training within the Department of Psychology relatively easy access to research and testing participants. This type of participant pool is commonplace in Departments of Psychology throughout the United States. Access to such a pool enables researchers and psychologists in training to complete more research and testing training with minimal participant recruitment effort. In addition, just as current students benefit from the knowledge obtained through the research participation of past generations of students, so too will future generations benefit from the participation of current students. In fulfillment of these purposes, the procedures for the Pool are designed to ensure fair and ethical recruitment of research and testing participants. The PSY 1300 Subject Pool may not be used for research purposes in organized courses but can be used for supervised research sections (i.e., PSY 4000, PSY 7000).

Section 2: Interface with Psychology 1300

1. Students in PSY 1300 may earn up to 15% of their grade by participating in research. This equals 7.5 "credits" of research participation. All PSY 1300 students have the option to earn 0.5 research credits by signing up on the Experimetrix system by a pre-set date (agreed upon by the subject pool coordinator and PSY 1300 coordinator before the semester begins), regardless of their intention to participate in additional research experiences. Students then can choose between participating in research experiences or an alternate experience for earning the remaining 7 credits (or the total 7.5 credits if they miss the early sign-up bonus). Students may blend research experiences and the alternate experience in any combination to achieve a total of 7.5 points.

2. The alternate experience consists of reading brief psychology journal articles and writing 1-2 page papers summarizing the articles and discussing how they fit with what the student is learning in class. Each paper earns up to 1 credit; students who do not earn the full 1 credit the first time they submit a paper will receive feedback on how to improve it and have the option to resubmit it for full credit. These journal articles are from the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science. This alternate experience (i.e., reading, summarizing, and discussing brief journal articles) is designed to take approximately the same amount of time and effort as participating in the research studies. Data collected from students in PSY 1300 in Summer 2003, indicated that it takes the typical PSY 1300 student 30-60 minutes to read the journal article and type a 1-2 page paper summarizing the article (E. E. Hardin, 2003, unpublished data).

Section 3: Experimetrix

1. The Psychology Department uses a web-based system (i.e., Experimetrix) to recruit, sign-up, and log research credit to research participants.

2. Access to Experimetrix is limited in the following ways to protect student confidentiality:

  1. PSY 1300 students will have access only to their own research participation record and information about experiments that have slots available for sign-up.
  2. PSY 1300 instructors will have access to all student research participation records so that instructors can include participation credit in grade calculations.
  3. Experimenters will have access to sign-up data for their own experiments only.
  4. TTU Experimetrix administrators will have access to all aspects of the TTU Experimetrix system.

3. To further ensure student confidentiality, all student and experiment information will be erased from Experimetrix at the end of each Fall and Spring semester and Summer Session II.

Section 4: How Researchers Request Access to the Pool

1. Researchers will complete the Experiment Number Request form (see Appendix A). These forms are available in the Psychology Department Main Office (Psy 119). As noted on the form, researchers must attach a copy of their IRB approval, which will be returned to the researcher when access to the Pool is granted.

2. The form and attachment will be placed in the 1300 Pool Graduate Assistant’s (GA’s) mailbox.

3. The GA will assure that researchers have provided all of the necessary information and that IRB approval is current, and will assign an Experiment Number (which is the Experimetrix logon) and password, so that the experiment can be identified in the Experimetrix system.

4. The GA will return all materials to the researcher’s department mailbox.

Section 5: How Participants Are Recruited

1. Each researcher will complete the information requested by Experimetrix (see Appendix B). Note that although paying participants is an option in Experimetrix, participants from PSY 1300 are never paid for their participation in research conducted through the Psychology 1300 Research and Testing Participant Pool. Thus, this feature of Experimetrix is not used in the TTU Psychology Department.

In the interest of random selection for all experiments, researchers will use only the Experiment Number to identify their experiment except for necessary restrictions such as “left-handed women only.” New Experiment Numbers will be assigned each semester and summer. Because the two summer sessions are so short, the same Experiment Number will be used for both summer sessions in the same summer. Researchers will give only the requested information on the Experimetrix header. Any additional information designed to draw participants to a particular study is not allowed.

2. Except for the Mass Survey, experimenters may not obtain a list of names and make appointments later.

3. Except for the Mass Survey and research explicitly on the scholarship of teaching and learning, experiments and questionnaires may not be given in Psy 1300 classrooms. Psy 1300 instructors are prohibited from recruiting from their own classes, except through the regular sign-up procedures.

Section 6: Informed Consent

All experiments conducted using the Psy 1300 research pool must follow informed consent guidelines established by the TTU IRB.

Section 7: How Participants Sign-up for Experiments

1. Students in Psy 1300 may sign up for experiments throughout the academic term in which they are enrolled in this course. Students will peruse the available experiments via Experimetrix and determine for which experiments they are eligible. Students will sign up for the experiments with no knowledge of the purpose of the experiments.

2. Participants may cancel an appointment, via Experimetrix or by contacting the researcher, not less than two hours before the appointment. If experimenters require more than two hours notice of a student cancellation, this will be noted in the header describing that experiment.

Section 8: Assigning Participation Credit

1. Experiment credit will be assigned within Experimetrix to each participant within two business days of the conclusion of each session for a given experiment.

2. Credit will be issued only for time spent in the experiment. There is no other legitimate use of these Credits.

3. The default amount of credit to be awarded for a specific session of an experiment will be determined prior to requesting an experiment number from the Experimetrix system for the experiment. Default credit will be given at the rate of ½ credits for each 30 minutes or part thereof.

4. Procedures specific to web-based experiments:

  1. Because of difficulties accurately assessing time spent by a student actually participating in a web-based study, all students who participate in a specific web-based study will receive the default amount of credit for that study.
  2. A participant must at least complete the consent procedure for a web-based study to receive credit for participating in that study. Simply logging on to the website for the study does not constitute “keeping the appointment” or “participating” in a web-based study. Therefore, no credit will be awarded for students who log on but do not complete even the consent procedure for web-based studies.
  3. Occasionally, students sign up for a web-based study, but do not log into the website or complete the study's consent procedure. Those students do not receive any credit. Please note, however, that those students do NOT receive a penalty either, i.e., they do NOT lose points for "missing the appointment" or "failing to show up for the study".

5. Procedures specific to non-web-based experiments:

  1. Participants must sign up for a specific time for an experiment.
  2. Because there is no educational benefit, simply showing up for the appointment and then leaving does not constitute “keeping the appointment” in a non-web-based study. Therefore, no credit will be awarded for students who arrive for the appointment but do not have the study explained to them via the consent procedure for non-web-based studies.
  3. Students who arrive on time, stay for the consent procedure, and decline to become participants in a non-web-based study receive 1/2 credit for “keeping their appointments” (but no additional credits for other appointments that would have been required by the experiment, i.e., additional sessions). Note that these participants will receive one-half credit regardless of the default amount of credit that would have been awarded for completion of that experimental session.
  4. Students who complete the consent procedure for an experiment and agree to become participants will receive at least the default amount of credit for that individual session, regardless of any later decision they might make about early withdrawal from that session. (Note that students who withdraw from an experimental session before completing the session will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any future sessions for that experiment; thus, these students will not receive additional credits for other appointments that would have been required by the experiment.)
  5. Participants who complete the experimental session in less time than was anticipated by the researchers will receive the default amount of credit, regardless of the amount of time spent in the experiment session.
  6. If a participant spends more time in an experimental session than was anticipated by the experimenter and specified in the default amount of credit, then that participant will receive an additional ½ credit for each extra ½ hour or part thereof that is spent in the experimental session.
  7. Researchers have an obligation to keep all appointments with participants. If appointments must be canceled, researchers will do so at least 24 hours in advance via Experimetrix. No credit is awarded for appointments canceled in this way. If cancellation cannot occur at least 24 hours before the scheduled appointment, researchers will ensure that someone is waiting in the scheduled room for the experiment to credit the participants who keep their appointments. Participants will receive full credit for keeping these appointments. That is, if the appointment was supposed to take 2 hours, the students will receive 2 credits.
  8. If a participant fails to keep an appointment, then they do not receive any credit. Please note, however, that they do NOT receive a penalty either, i.e., they do NOT lose points for "missing the appointment" or "failing to show up for the study".

Grants

All faculty members are encouraged to apply for both internal and external sources of funding. Any

proposal that involves human participants must be approved by TTU's IRB. For external funding (e.g., NIH, NSF), it is best to apply for IRB approval well before the grant is due so that the Human Subjects form can accompany the proposal. Completed proposals must have a TTU Internal Routing Sheet attached. Give a copy of the proposal (including the budget) along with the Routing Sheet to the Department Chair who will read the proposal, look at the budget, and sign the Routing Sheet. You should allow 24 hours for the Department Chair to read the proposal and review the budget. Then, the Routing Sheet, along with one copy of the grant proposal should be delivered to the Office of Research Services (ORS). They will obtain the additional signatures, copy the proposal, and arrange to mail it to the agency. If you are close to a deadline for an external grant, you may want to ensure that the Department Chair and the Associate Dean for Research will be available to sign your proposal when you're ready to have it signed. ORS can work with you to develop the budget, using the proper rates for fringe benefits and facilities and administrative costs (indirects).

A portion of the indirects of funded grants (presently about 22%) is returned to the department. The Department's policy is to return those funds to the principal investigator to use to further his/her research program.

Graduate Student Research Awards

Each year, the Department of Psychology honors up to three graduate students with an award for excellence in research and related scholarly activity. Students who have successfully proposed their dissertations are invited to apply. The awards are to consist of a cash award of $100 plus a plaque awarded from the faculty. Students submit applications to the director of their division, and awards are determined by the faculty of the division. Criteria for the award include the following:

• Exceptional quality of 7000 project and dissertation study (or proposal)

• Continuous and sustained involvement in additional research, including research with their advisor or other faculty of TTU or TTUHSC

• Authorship or co-authorship on journal articles, book chapters, presentations at professional conferences, or submitted grant proposals.

Note: This award is not meant to be the “best” dissertation or 7000 project, or the highest GPA. Rather the award will be made to those students who have maintained active, continuous, and exceptional involvement in research and scholarship over the course of their graduate career and who demonstrates exceptional promise to make a contribution to the science of psychology.

Service

Departmental Committees

All faculty members (except perhaps first-year faculty) are expected to contribute to the University, College, and Department by serving on committees. Departmental committee assignments will be made by the Department Chair in consultation with Program Directors and faculty members. The Chair will attempt to distribute such committee service in a reasonable and equitable manner across faculty members. It is expected that each faculty member will serve on at least one departmental standing committee each year. In addition, faculty will be asked to serve on at least some tenure and promotion and 3rd year review committees, search committees, and graduate student petition review committees.

The Department's Standing Committees are:

Graduate Programs Committee (GPC): Recommends graduate curriculum revisions, makes recommendations about graduate enrollment policies, advises chair on funding for graduate student research and travel support, rates Summer Dissertation Award proposals, plans and coordinates graduate recruiting efforts. Works on developing external practica for students in all programs and identifying sources of increased funding for graduate students.


Director of Graduate Studies serves on this committee.
Liaison: Graduate Council representative

Undergraduate Programs Committee (UPC): Recommends undergraduate curriculum revisions, makes recommendations for undergraduate scholarships, and develops empirically based student outcomes assessments. Develops a means of tracking undergraduate alumni. Develops mechanism by which faculty advise undergraduates about graduate school and careers. The Academic Program Assistant is ex officio on this committee.

Resources, Equipment, and Space Committee (RESC): Advises chair on allocation of space, works with chair to prioritize capital improvement and remodeling projects, develops ways to increase computer access for students, oversees library planning and purchases, recommends subject pool and mass survey policies, plans and coordinates development efforts to increase scholarship endowments. Encourages grant proposal writing.


Liaison: Department Safety Coordinator

Psychological Applications to Health and Safety Steering Committee

Works on 2004 Behavioral Medicine conference. Addresses funding issues for this and future conferences. Develops plans for a self-sustaining conference series and makes preliminary plans for the 2006 conference. Department Chair chairs this committee.

Consulting

Consulting is permitted as long as such activities do not interfere with the primary responsibilities to TTU of teaching, research, and service. Paid consulting must be approved on a "Request for Approval of Outside Employment" signed by the Department Chair and Dean in September of each year. Normally, requests for up to 10-12 hours of consulting per week are approved.

Limited Professional Services in the Psychology Clinic

(Approved by the Psychology Faculty, April 16, 2002)

The rationale for allowing licensed Psychology Department faculty to provide limited professional services in the Psychology Clinic is as follows:

1. Increase in funds for the Clinic.

2. Allow for contracts with agencies that require that licensed professionals provide service at the site, e.g., Protective and Regulatory Services.

3. Allow for third party billing, e.g., Medicare, Medicaid, Insurance Companies.

4. Provide extra support for research and professional activities of some faculty and their students.

5. Increase the census in the Clinic throughout the year.

6. Increase partnership opportunities between the TTU Psychology Clinic and the Lubbock community.

7. Provide for new and enhanced training opportunities for students in our APA approved doctoral programs in Clinical and Counseling Psychology.

In the clinic in addition to policies described in the Clinic Policy and Procedure Manual, the following additional policies would become effective.

1. Only psychology department faculty are eligible to practice in the clinic.

2. Practice by each specific faculty member must not exceed 10 hrs/week.

3. Therapists must be currently licensed by the state of Texas and must have $1,000,000/$3,000,000 personal malpractice coverage.

4. Clients must be genuine referrals for the faculty therapist and cannot be gleaned from a waiting list for student therapists.

5. Money generated by the faculty therapist will go into a designated account with 25% of the money generated going into the Clinic account. The remaining 75% will go into a specific account to support the research and professional activities of the faculty member who generated the funds. These funds may be spent by the faculty member for professional development in accordance with state laws (examples for use of these funds may include computer equipment, graduate student research support, travel to professional conferences, professional fees, research equipment, journals, books).

6. Faculty cannot use the clinic as a place to solicit business for consulting or practice outside the clinic.

7. The clinic will file all insurance claims.

8. The clinic will do all billing with the fee set by the faculty member providing the service.

A committee consisting of faculty members who will provide services and at least one faculty member who does not intend to provide services will set specific policy and procedures. These will be incorporated into the Clinic Policy and Procedure Manual.

Policies and Procedures Related to Resources

Space Policy for Faculty

(Adopted by the faculty, May, 1999)

The Psychology Department is committed to providing adequate office and research space so that all faculty can be productive. The following principles will determine the allocation of space.

1. Any general policy regarding space will be approved by the entire faculty.

2. The faculty will be involved in ongoing reviews of space allocation. The Resources, Equipment, and Space Committee shall advise the Chair on space allocation.

3. The Chair is responsible for resource (including space) allocation in the department. (This is also TTU policy.) No person is entitled to permanent occupancy of space.

4. Space is used to provide for basic faculty needs (offices) and minimal research functions. Beyond that, space allocation is linked to need with the understanding that different types of research require different types and amounts of space. Space allocation is also linked to research activity and productivity. Research productivity will be measured by factors such as refereed publications, grant funding, presentations at conferences, doctoral student research, and numbers of students at all levels involved in the research.

5. Space should be efficiently utilized. To the extent possible, some space should be identified as shared departmental space that can be used for activities common to several researchers (such as testing stations and interview rooms). Thus sharing of some departmental space should become a common practice.

Support Staff

Business Manager

The Psychology Department's Business Manager (currently in Room 117 H) deals with the department's finances and personnel. You should not ask her to do routine typing, xeroxing, etc.; but do contact her about travel, ordering equipment, hiring personnel from grants, making colloquium speakers' hotel reservations, ordering keys, graduate student records, and graduate scholarships. Put requests for the Business Manager in writing, either with a note or in e-mail, rather than stopping her in the hall or poking your head in her door and asking her to do something.

Departmental Secretaries

There are two full-time departmental secretaries in the main departmental office (Room 119). As well as serving as receptionists and handling phone calls, they do typing, xeroxing, and mailing for faculty. For xeroxing and typing, fill out a work order describing what you need to have done and when you need it, and place it, along with the materials to be typed or copied, in the box on the file cabinets. A secretary will complete your job as soon as possible and place it, along with a signed work order, in your mailbox. Please use this generic system of requesting help rather than going to your favorite secretary. It allows our staff to better allocate their workloads

If you are asking our staff to type or xerox tests, please give them plenty of lead time, especially for final exams. Xeroxing requests should be submitted 48 hours before the exam time. Typing requests should be submitted well in advance of that, depending upon how much typing is needed. If a long, multiple-choice test is to be typed and copied, secretaries should have it a week before the exam date.

Departmental Technician

The department hires a technician on a half-time basis. The technician can deal with all types of computer-related jobs, such as installing software, setting up new computers, replacing some computer parts, troubleshooting problems, communicating with the vendors for purchases or repairs, or sending out computers or peripherals for repair. This is not a staff position, but has been a part-time job for a student, usually in computer science. Thus, the technician's hours are varied, but the department has had technical services about 20 hours a week. To request help from the technician, pick up a technician's work request from the mailboxes in the main office. Fill out all the parts, including whether or not you wish to be present during the work. Put the form in the Business Manager's mailbox. She will give it to the technician and also keep track of the progress of your job. After the technician has completed the job, the faculty member will receive the work order back to indicate whether the job was satisfactorily completed. It is important that this final step be completed, so that the department can keep track of what the technician is doing and how well he is doing it.

Academic Program Assistant

The Department has a full time Academic Program Assistant (currently housed in Room 108) who handles undergraduate advising. The advisor is responsible for completing students' degree plans, helping students plan their schedules, and answering routine questions about undergraduate requirements. The advisor also has access to TechSIS through which students can register and faculty can see class enrollments, get class lists, and see room sizes. (The Department Chair, Business Manager, and departmental secretaries also have access to this system.) The advisor will usually have 1-2 graduate students helping with undergraduate advising. At times (beginnings of semesters) when the load is too heavy for the advisor and her assistants, faculty members will be asked to help with advising. Faculty members are always responsible for advising students about graduate school and career options. Faculty should be willing to talk with any student who is referred to them by the advising office, either during office hours or by appointment.

Graduate Assistants

Graduate assistants will usually be assigned to new faculty members and to department members with major administrative appointments, and to faculty members who are teaching courses with laboratories or very large classes. Such assistants will usually have a 1/4-time appointment, which means they should work 10 hours per week. Faculty members should ensure that assistants do work about 10 hours per week. Expectations should be clearly described to assistants. Graduate assistants who are helping with a course should hold office hours, and students should be encouraged to use them for help. All graduate assistants will be evaluated by their supervisors each semester.

Office Supplies

The Department maintains supply cabinets that contain most standard office supplies, including pens, markers, tablets, staples, paper clips, post-it notes, transparencies, stationery, and envelopes. Ask the departmental secretaries for needed supplies. If the department does not have needed items, ask the secretaries whether they can purchase them from campus suppliers.

Purchasing

Faculty may either charge or be reimbursed for supplies, teaching materials, and small items necessary for their research and teaching. If a desired item is over $100, the faculty member should consult with the Department Chair before making the purchase. If an item is under $100, the faculty member should discuss the purchase in advance with the Department's Business Manager so that she can identify the appropriate fund for the purchase and give advice about the most efficient way to purchase the item. Faculty members should also talk with the Business Manager before purchasing equipment items from grants and other non-departmental funds. Three bids (one from a minority business and one from a woman-owned business) must be obtained for all equipment purchases (ordinarily over $2,000), and normally, the purchase will be made from the lowest bidder. Faculty planning to purchase equipment should start early because the bidding and purchasing process takes time. All state-appropriated funds must be spent during a single fiscal year (Sept. 1 through Aug. 31).

Travel

Travel to scientific meetings is encouraged for all faculty members. The Department's travel budget is limited, and it must be used for recruiting of new faculty as well as for faculty travel. The Department Chair will decide how much money can be used for faculty travel each year and that amount will be split evenly among all full-time faculty members who are actively participating in scientific meetings or conventions. In order to use departmental travel money, faculty members must present a paper at a conference or engage in some other activity that will clearly benefit Texas Tech and the department. An "Authorization for Official Travel" form should be filed at least a month before the travel is to take place (but ALWAYS BEFORE the travel occurs). Be as accurate as possible about travel dates and accounts to be used for reimbursement. Later changes mean that the whole application must be resubmitted. For any professional travel, this form should be filed whether or not reimbursement from the University is sought because it indicates how course and administrative responsibilities will be covered during the travel. If reimbursement is sought, the faculty member should save ORIGINAL receipts for air travel, hotels, taxis, and meals. Give receipts to the Business Manager immediately upon return from the trip. She will fill out an expense voucher form which the faculty member must sign in duplicate. The reimbursement will be limited to the amount set for faculty travel for the year, independently of the dollar amount submitted in receipts. Reimbursement checks will usually be issued in about one month.

Communications

All faculty members have internet hook-ups in their offices. They are encouraged to use e-mail in place of the long-distance telephone calls, whenever possible. Long distance phone calls will be funded from the department's operating budget, but they should be made only for business purposes, kept short, and made only when necessary. In order to make a long distance call from a department phone, dial 88-1-area code and phone number. Personal calls should not be charged to department phones even if the faculty or staff member intends to reimburse the department because the department has no way of putting money back into the operating account. Long distance calls to seek other employment should be considered personal calls and should not be made with the expectation that the department will pay for them. Faculty and staff members who must make personal long distance calls from department phones should use a phone card or a credit call to charge the calls. The department FAX machine in the main office is available for professional correspondence. Keep the length of FAXes to a reasonable number of pages. To send a FAX outside of the area, punch in 88-1-area code and phone number. Ask assistance from the departmental secretaries to send an international FAX because there are some special codes for international billing. Personal FAXes are allowed; these will be charged at $0.50 per page.

Copying

All faculty will be given a 5-digit PIN number for use in the Copy machines. Faculty members can either do their own copying or ask the secretaries to do it. If there is a problem with the Copy machine, ask the departmental secretaries to fix it. Costly repairs are often necessary when students and faculty who haven't been well trained in the use of the machines attempt to fix jams in the machines. The departmental operating budget will pay for copying related to faculty teaching and research, and to graduate student teaching. Personal copies will not be funded from the department operating budget; these should be recorded on the clipboard near the Copy machines. Students, staff, and faculty who make personal copies will be billed monthly for their copies, and they should pay the departmental secretaries quickly upon receiving the bill. The department also has a scanner attached to a computer and printer that is available for faculty use. The departmental secretaries can show faculty and students how to use it, or the secretaries can do the scanning.

Mailing

Use campus mail for all correspondence within TTU and TTUHSC. Other professional correspondence should be sent via regular first-class mail whenever possible. The department's account number is below the return address on all departmental envelopes. Use these for proper billing of postage. If other types of envelopes are used (larger ones or pre-addressed envelopes), use one of the department's return address labels that has the account number on it. Place first-class mail in the slot in the copy room door. Overnight delivery services should be used sparingly, but they can be used when there is a need for fast delivery. The University has contracts with Federal Express and other overnight services. Ask the departmental secretaries to give you the proper mailing envelopes and forms for use of such services. Mail Tech (the University's mailing service) picks up items for overnight delivery twice daily (at about 9:30 and 1:30).

Appendix A : A Self-Help Manual for New Faculty

Partially reprinted from an early Chair's workshop at APA (Toronto, 1978). Background materials prepared by Gregory Kimble (former chair at Duke University) for a new chair's workshop with added lessons by other chairs.

Dr. Kimble's "Lessons" (with some local modifications)


Lesson 1. In life, there are first things and most important things. In this University, the first thing is your responsibility to the students. Fulfilling that responsibility earns for you the right to do the most important thing--- research. Get your courses in shape and only then get into the laboratory.
Lesson 2. In research, ideas are more important than elegant equipments and fancy space. Clarence Graham did the work that made him a member of the National Academy in a converted coal bin.
Lesson 3. Give some thought to where you want to be five or ten years from now and turn your research in that direction.
Lesson 4. In your research work, keep an eye on application. The psychological world is turning that direction (advice given in 1978 that is more true today).
Lesson 5. Don't let the bookpersons seduce you. Writing textbooks can be lucrative, but you need to establish your reputation before turning your scholarly career that way.
Lesson 6. It is important that you publish. You must do so if you are to participate in the benefits of academic life. Not only your place in the university but your self evaluation will depend on it. Numbers of publications are less important than quality. Stick to refereed journals; the others count against you.
Lesson 7. Take on administrative responsibility slowly. Five years from now, the department and University will call on you for important contributions of that type. You should be willing to serve, but get your scholarly feet on the ground first.
Lesson 8. Be a good university and departmental citizen. Participate in faculty meetings. Attend colloquia and graduate student presentations. A little exposure to work outside of your own field will not hurt you. Get your textbook orders in on time. Do your grading conscientiously. Treat students with respect even when you must deny their requests. Always take your teaching seriously.

Other Important "Lessons"

Lesson 9. Begin working on a grant as soon as you can. Writing a grant will never be easier than soon after finishing your dissertation. You know the literature now better than you ever will. Apply for local Research Enhancement Funds. Look for programs like B-START that were designed for young faculty. At least try to obtain funding.
Lesson 10. Your reputation precedes you and colors your dealings with the rest of the university. A good reputation is hard to win but worth the effort. It is also easy to lose. A "bad" reputation can interfere with your ability to get those things that you need to perform your work and thus can slow or stop the progress of your career. Protect your credibility and integrity. When you give your word, keep it.
Lesson 11. Always try to be poised, ethical, articulate and professional.
Lesson 12. Like it or not, you are new-- new to the department and new to the role of a faculty member. Departmental and university operating procedures and policies are unfamiliar. Ask questions. The answers you get will make your life easier. Recruit one or more "mentors" among the senior faculty and use them.
Lesson 13. Administrators (including Chairs, Deans, and Provosts) hate surprises. Keep your chair informed of what you are doing or trying to do. The Chair can keep the Dean informed who can keep the Provost informed. Your concerns will receive a better audience if they go through that "chain of command" than if you take them directly to top administrators.

Return to the Table of Contents

Appendix B: Dos and Don'ts from the Psychology Staff

DO


Be courteous to staff members. They are working hard to please many different people.
Complement the staff when they've done a good job for you.
Respect the staff's space by not sitting at their desks or using their computers and telephones when they're away.
Comply with staff members' requests in a timely manner. Turn in your book orders, syllabi, and grades on time. Give them your office hours and pay for Xeroxing and FAXes.
Ask a staff member to show you how to use office equipment and to fix jams in the Xerox machine.
Get work requests in with plenty of lead time.
Put work requests in the "in" box on top of the file cabinet with complete written instructions.
Send requests for keys and other things via e-mail to the Business Manager, rather than stopping her in the hall and making your request.
Remember that you aren't the only faculty member making requests. The staff is juggling work from many people.

DON'T


Expect staff members to be your personal secretaries.
Blame the staff for things that aren't under their control. They don't set the due dates for book orders or grades, and they don't create administrative red tape.
Keep staff members from working by talking with them for long periods of time.
Blame staff members for your own failings. If you got a test in late, don't expect them to drop everything to complete it for you.

Return to the Table of Contents

Appendix C: Arts and Sciences Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

GUIDELINES FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION

I. Introduction

The “College of Arts and Sciences Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion” is one of four documents governing the granting of tenure and promotion of Arts and Sciences faculty. The other three documents are: (a) the Texas Tech University Tenure Policy, which is currently a supplement to the Faculty Handbook, (b) O.P. 32.01, available at http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/OP32.01.pdf, and (c) the individual department’s or school’s tenure and promotion guidelines and criteria. Unit guidelines must be consistent with those of the College of Arts and Sciences, and any revisions must be submitted for the approval of the Dean by July 1 of the year in which they are to be put into effect.

Chairpersons or Directors must provide access to these documents to any candidate for tenure and promotion. A signed statement by the candidate stating that he or she has seen these documents and received a copy of the dossier must accompany the promotion and/or tenure dossier.

The College and the University view the probationary period for tenure-track faculty as an essential time for determining whether the faculty member will be able to sustain a strong and continuous record of effective teaching, significant research and creative activity, and service to the unit and the profession. Thus, the College of Arts and Sciences normally will not recommend candidates for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor prior to their sixth year of service unless a compelling reason for doing so is advanced by the unit and/or the candidate. If a candidate wishes to be considered prior to the end of the normal probationary period, he or she should notify the chairperson or director, and the chairperson or director should consult with the Dean.

II. Procedures at the Departmental Level

Evaluation at the departmental level begins in the first year of a tenure-track faculty member’s service at Texas Tech. This evaluation is to be conducted in accordance with the guidelines provided in the College of Arts and Sciences “Procedures for the Review of Untenured Faculty.”

It is the responsibility of the chairperson or director to notify the faculty of the department or school deadlines for applying for tenure and promotion. These deadlines must be sufficiently early to permit a thorough evaluation of each candidate’s teaching, research, and service achievements and to enable the chairperson or director to submit originals and copies of a well-organized dossier to the Dean’s Office by the third Friday in October.

The version of the dossier to be forwarded ultimately to the Provost should conform to O.P. 32.01. The basic form is as follows and should be presented in a three-ring binder (Format Checklist available from Office of the Dean):


1. Dean’s letter
2. Chairperson’s or Director’s letter
3. Vita (with chairperson’s/director’s ratings of publication or creative activities)
4. Solicited and unsolicited letters (as in item 10 on College Format Checklist)
5. Basic information (parts 1-9 of item C, pp. 4-6 of Attachment A to OP 32.01)
6. Teaching effectiveness (as in item 11 on College Format Checklist)
7. Research and creative activities (as in item 11 on College Format Checklist)
8. Service activities (as in item 11 on College Format Checklist)

As an appendix to the original dossier and copies for the College of Arts and Sciences only (not in the copy for the Provost), the following materials should be added:


• Ballot comments (but not the ballots)
• Annual general peer evaluations, if available (e.g., advisory committee reports)
• Annual faculty reports with chair’s/director’s assessments, Third-Year Review in appropriate position, all chronologically (Third-Year Review to contain review report, chair’s letter, ballot report).

In working with the candidate in preparing the dossier, the chairperson or director should keep the following points in mind:

1. A candidate who does not receive a majority vote from the department or school faculty and/or the support of the chairperson or director may elect to have his or her dossier sent forward to the Dean’s Office. However, in such circumstances the candidate should be made aware of the fundamental importance of peer evaluation and of the need for an exceptionally strong dossier and/or rationale to receive favorable recommendations at the higher levels of review.

2. The candidate’s dossier should contain a comprehensive summary of peer and student teaching evaluations. The chairperson or director, who is responsible for compiling it, should sign the summary of student evaluations.

3. The candidate’s dossier should contain evidence of the comparative quality of the publications and/or creative activities of the candidate. This is to be done by the chair rating the outlets in accordance with the guidelines in O.P. 32.01. This rating is to be done on the vita. Chairpersons or Directors and faculty should independently assess the candidate’s publications and/or creative activities prior to voting rather than depending only on the reputation of the outlets.

4. Outside letters of recommendation must be solicited on behalf of the candidate and included in the dossier.

5. Ballots should be submitted unsigned by the voting faculty to the chairperson or director, who, in the presence of one other faculty member of the same unit, will tally them and record the tally on the form to be forwarded to the Dean’s Office. The chairperson or director will indicate in writing to the Dean the name of the other faculty member who witnessed or assisted in the counting.

6. Faculty members should be encouraged to explain fully the reasons for their votes. These unsigned comments should be typed, rather than handwritten. They are to be collected, separate from the ballots, and forwarded by the chairperson or director to the Dean’s Office appended to the dossier.

7. The Chairperson’s or Director’s letter should clearly state his or her recommendation and the reasons for this recommendation. A copy of this letter must be given to the candidate at the time the dossier is forwarded to the Dean’s Office.

8. The candidate must see the dossier, but he or she does not have to approve it. Letters of rebuttal from candidates are not accepted as part of the dossier.

9. Seven copies of the dossier plus the original are to be submitted to the Dean’s Office. One copy, not the original, is to be placed in a three-ring binder for subsequent submission to the Provost. An additional copy will be provided to the candidate.

III. Procedures at the College Level

The College of Arts and Sciences conducts its own independent tenure and promotion deliberations. Chairpersons or Directors should inform candidates that this review is not a mere formality. A favorable vote from the department or school and a favorable recommendation from the chairperson or director do not guarantee that the ultimate recommendation from the College of Arts and Sciences, and later from the Graduate Dean, the Provost, and the President to the Board of Regents, will be favorable. Likewise, unfavorable departmental or school votes are not always upheld.

At the College level, the Arts and Sciences Tenure and Promotion Committee, appointed and chaired by the Dean (or his/her designee), is responsible for making recommendations to the Dean on all tenure and promotion applications. Following careful deliberations, the Committee takes a formal vote, which is recorded on the Consideration of Tenure and Promotion Form. Committee members do not vote on tenure and promotion applications from their own departments or schools. The Dean does not cast a vote at this stage.

In their deliberations, Committee members rely primarily on the evidence contained in the applicant’s dossier. For this reason it is important that the dossier be complete and compiled in a neat, professional manner. The Committee may, however, ask for additional information. In all cases in which there is a serious question about the desirability of recommending tenure for a candidate in his or her mandatory year for consideration of tenure, the candidate and the department chairperson or school director will be asked to meet individually with the Committee. At the discretion of the Dean, other individuals may be asked to meet with the Committee as well.

Following the deliberations of the Tenure and Promotion Committee, the Dean will make his/her own independent recommendation. He/She will at this point inform the candidate of his/her decision, permitting the candidate to decide whether or not he or she wishes to have the dossier sent on for further evaluation.

IV. Standards for Academic Ranks

1. Assistant Professor: For promotion from the rank of Instructor to Assistant Professor the candidate must have the ability to teach effectively and hold the terminal degree (or its equivalent) as defined by the academic unit as appropriate to the position of Assistant Professor. In addition, the candidate must show promise for growth in teaching, research, and service.

2. Associate Professor: Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor requires that the candidate have (a) a demonstrated record of effectiveness as a teacher, (b) a record of peer-evaluated publication or creative activity which has contributed to the discipline or field of study, to the candidate’s intellectual and artistic development, and to the quality of his or her academic unit, (c) a demonstrated record of significant contributions to the university’s graduate programs through such activities as teaching of graduate courses, service on thesis or dissertation committees, or supervising graduate students; (d) a record of promise for growth in service.

3. Professor: For promotion to the highest academic rank, the candidate’s academic achievement and professional reputation must be superior. The candidate is expected to demonstrate a clear and continuing record of significant involvement in the university’s graduate programs through such activities as teaching of graduate courses, service on thesis or dissertation committees, or supervising graduate students. This rank can be earned only by a candidate who has demonstrated continued growth in, and has a cumulative record of, teaching effectiveness, substantial peer-reviewed publication or creative activity, and professional contributions and service.

V. Standards for Tenure

A favorable tenure decision requires that the candidate have (a) a demonstrated record of effectiveness as a teacher, (b) a record of peer-evaluated publication or creative activity which has contributed to the discipline or field of study, to the candidate’s intellectual and artistic development, and to the quality of his or her academic unit, (c) a demonstrated record of significant contributions to the university’s graduate programs through such activities as teaching of graduate courses, service on thesis or dissertation committees, or supervising graduate students, (d) a record of promise for growth in service.

Appendix D: A&S Procedures for Third-Year Review

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE THIRD-YEAR REVIEW

OF FACULTY IN TENURE-ACQUIRING POSITIONS (last revised August 2004)

Introduction

When the College of Arts and Sciences hires a tenure-track faculty member, it is with the expectation that the individual will become tenured and serve the university in a long and productive career. The tenured faculty in the department should encourage tenure-track faculty and assist them toward success in their careers. The tenured faculty will assist in determining whether or not the criteria for tenure are met prior to its award. Thus, it is to the advantage of both the tenure-track faculty member and the department to see that timely evaluations are made of a tenure-track faculty member’s performance, and that deficiencies identified be made known to the untenured faculty member in time for correction prior to the expiration of the probationary term.

The department chairperson recommends to the dean the initial employment of a tenure-track faculty member. In making such recommendations, the chairperson should consider the advice of the faculty, especially the tenured faculty. Careful attention should be given to the candidates for a position on the faculty to ensure that potential for effective teaching, successful research/creative activity, and appropriate service warrants appointment to the faculty.

Before the new faculty member begins his or her duties, he or she should be counseled by the chairperson or a designated representative as to the responsibilities of his or her position. These responsibilities should be summarized in written form for the new faculty member, with a copy placed in the faculty member's departmental file and a copy forwarded to the dean's office for inclusion in the file maintained there. Each new faculty member should be informed that he or she is expected to teach and advise students effectively and to keep abreast of and contribute to his or her discipline through research/creative activity and other appropriate scholarly and professional endeavors. Unless specified otherwise in the initial letter of employment, tenure-probationary faculty members are expected, among their other responsibilities, to teach graduate students and to seek outside funding for their research/creative activity. As the person's tenure-track period as a faculty member proceeds, membership on committees at various levels, together with other types of service, will be expected. All faculty members must either be provided copies of or given access to departmental, college, and university policies related to faculty duties.

It is the responsibility of both the chairperson and the tenure-track faculty member to meet each year to discuss the faculty member’s progress in his or her probationary period. The chairperson’s assessment of the faculty member’s progress also must be provided in writing each year, including comments both positive and negative, as appropriate. In preparing the annual assessment, the chairperson may consider the views of tenured faculty members. This may be done through consultation with the executive committee of the department or through other means as described in the department’s handbook or policy statements. The annual evaluations and the report of the third-year review committee indicated below must be retained as a part of the tenure-track faculty member's file. The Arts and Sciences Tenure and Promotion Committee may later request copies of these materials to aid in its deliberations at the time of tenure review.

During any year of a tenure-acquiring appointment, a faculty member may be judged to be making unsatisfactory progress toward tenure on the basis of the annual reports or other sources of information. In any year, a terminal contract or notice of non-reappointment may be issued to an untenured faculty member by the department chairperson in conformity with deadlines stated in the tenure policy, and the university is not required to give a non-tenured faculty member a reason for a decision of non-reappointment.

Overview of Third Year Review Procedures

In the tenure-track faculty member's sixth long semester, a comprehensive evaluation of his or her performance will be undertaken (i.e., the third-year review). This evaluation is to be considered an opportunity to advise the tenure-track faculty member whether it is felt that satisfactory progress is or is not being made toward tenure. If progress is deemed to be satisfactory at this time, there is, nevertheless, no guarantee of ultimate tenure. If progress is deemed to be unsatisfactory in the third-year review and the tenure-track faculty member has been given an opportunity to respond to the unsatisfactory performance rating, then there are two alternatives available to the department: (1) a determination will be made to give the tenure-track faculty member a terminal contract, or (2) the department chairperson will provide, in writing, comments from the faculty and, if deemed appropriate by the chair and dean, specific requirements setting forth the conditions for continued employment and deadlines for completing the conditions.

Specific Procedures and Timetables for Third Year Reviews

l) The third-year review committee will be appointed by the chairperson or departmental executive committee and will consist of at least three tenured members. In departments with fewer than three tenured faculty members, external members will be appointed by the dean in consultation with the chairperson. This committee will be appointed by the first day of classes in the tenure-track faculty member’s sixth long semester.

2) The tenure-track faculty member will make available to the third-year review committee his or her materials as described below in the section on Dossier Requirements. These materials will be due on the same day that annual reviews are due as specified in O.P. 32.32.

3) The appointed committee will review carefully the tenure-track faculty member's teaching, research/creative activity, and service to evaluate whether satisfactory progress is being made toward meeting the department's, college’s, and university’s expectations for tenure. The committee will prepare, sign, and date a written report summarizing its evaluation.

4) On or before February 15, the review committee's report will be made available to both the tenure-track faculty member and to the tenured members of the faculty. The faculty member will be given the opportunity to respond to the report, and his or her signed and dated response, if any, will be made available to the tenured faculty on or before the last working day in February.

5) In considering the review committee’s report, the faculty member’s response to the report (if any), and the faculty member’s dossier, the tenured members of the department will follow procedures parallel to those followed by the department at the time of tenure review. If consistent with the procedure followed by the department in reviewing an application for tenure, the tenured members of the department and any appointed members will meet as a committee to discuss the report and to make themselves aware of the tenure-track faculty member's progress. If, at the time of consideration of tenure, a different procedure is followed by a given department, then that procedure should be followed at the third-year review. For example, if a department, at the time of consideration for tenure, does not engage in a group discussion but simply makes credentials available for review, then that department should not engage in group discussion at the third-year review.

6) By March 15 and subsequent to the customary third year review procedure as specified in the department’s handbook or policy statements, the tenured faculty will vote by written ballot as to whether or not the tenure-track faculty member is making satisfactory progress toward tenure. The ballot question will be the following: At this point in time, is [first and last name of person being reviewed] making satisfactory progress toward tenure as a faculty member in this department? The following three choices are to be offered on the ballot as possible answers: Yes, No, or Abstain. Comments regarding the third year faculty member’s progress may also be invited, and such comments may be provided on a separate page enclosed with the ballot. Ballots and comments are to be unsigned. The vote at this stage is not a vote on tenure and should not, of course, be construed as promise of final approval or rejection at the time of consideration of tenure.

a) Should the faculty member receive a vote indicating satisfactory progress toward tenure, he or she must be informed promptly of that fact by the chairperson and should be encouraged to continue his or her satisfactory performance. Within the next month (by April 15), the department chairperson should convey to the faculty member comments both positive and negative expressed by the tenured faculty. The tally of the ballots and any written comments must be retained in the faculty member’s file in the department. The tally and the comments will not be included automatically as part of the faculty member’s tenure dossier, but the Arts and Sciences Tenure and Promotion Committee may later request copies of these materials to aid in its deliberations at the time of tenure review.

b) Should the faculty member receive a vote indicating that, in the opinion of the tenured faculty, the candidate is not progressing satisfactorily toward a favorable tenure decision, he or she must be informed promptly of that fact by the chairperson, and then a decision must be made whether or not to terminate the appointment. In reaching a decision to recommend to the dean termination of a tenure-track appointment as a result of the third year review, the chairperson will first consult with tenured members of the department by conducting a ballot vote. The faculty member involved should be invited to submit to the tenured faculty any written evidence or statement desired and/or to appear before a meeting of the tenured faculty if he or she so wishes. If the third year faculty member so requests at this stage, the chairperson is to show him or her any written comments that were provided with the ballots. Any additional materials from the third year faculty member (materials that are signed and dated or that have a signed and dated cover sheet) must be provided and/or the meeting with the tenured faculty must be requested no later than March 30. A vote on whether or not to recommend termination of the appointment will be taken on or before April 15. The ballot question for this vote will be the following: Should [first and last name of person being reviewed] continue as a tenure-track faculty member in this department or should [first and last name of faculty member’s] employment as a tenure-track faculty member in this department be terminated? The following three choices are to be offered on the ballot as possible answers: Continue employment, Terminate employment, or Abstain. Comments may also be invited, and such comments can be provided on a separate page enclosed with the ballot. Ballots and comments are to be unsigned.

The results of this vote by the tenured faculty will constitute a faculty recommendation that will be conveyed promptly by the chairperson to the dean, who in consultation with the chairperson will make the decision regarding termination or continuation. If a decision is made to terminate the faculty member’s employment, a letter of non-reappointment will be issued by the chairperson before the end of the semester (to be defined as the day all final grades are due). Alternatively, if progress is deemed unsatisfactory but a decision to terminate employment is not made, the chairperson will by the end of the semester (to be defined as the day all final grades are due) convey to the faculty member a written account of comments both positive and negative expressed by the tenured faculty and, if deemed appropriate by the chair and the dean, specific, written requirements setting forth the conditions for continued employment and the deadlines for completing the conditions. In this case, the tallies of both ballots, any comments, and any written requirements for continued employment must be retained in the faculty member’s file in the department. The tallies, the comments, and any written requirements for continuation will not be included automatically as part of the faculty member’s tenure dossier, but the Arts and Sciences Tenure and Promotion Committee may later request copies of these materials to aid in its deliberations at the time of tenure review.

(c) Notices of non-reappointment, if any, will be made in conformity with deadlines stated in the university’s tenure policy.

Dossier Requirements for Third Year Reviews

The tenure-track faculty member will make available the following materials:


• Basic information in the same format required in dossiers for tenure and promotion consideration (see the Basic Information section in Attachment A of O.P. 32.01).
• A vita that includes information on education, professional appointments, teaching, research, and service. The vita may include whatever additional information the department may specify in its handbook or policy statements and whatever additional information about honors and awards or other professional contributions the tenure-track faculty member wishes to include.
• The faculty member’s brief self-statement on teaching, not to exceed one page.
• Statistical summaries of all teaching evaluations done by students and copies of at least some student evaluations done by entire classes.
• Copies of at least three teaching evaluations conducted by peers over the course of the faculty member’s employment at Texas Tech University. The department should specify in its handbook or policy statements the arrangements for all peer visits, including information about the manner and timing and number of such visits. More or fewer peer evaluations than are specified in the department’s policies may be required only if more or fewer evaluations would be required of all other faculty in similar circumstances or under similar conditions.
• Copies of syllabi and other teaching materials (such as exams or assignment sheets) the faculty member or department may wish the review committee to see.
• The faculty member’s brief self-statement on research/creative activity, not to exceed one page.
• Copies of publications, grant applications, or other materials that document the faculty member’s research/creative activity. Departments may specify if they wish to see all such materials or only selected examples.
• The faculty member’s brief self-statement on service, not to exceed one page.
• Copies of all annual reports to date and copies of all chair’s evaluations to date.
• Any other materials specified in the department’s handbook or policy statement plus other pertinent materials, if any, the candidate may wish the review committee to see.

This revision of the policy shall become effective immediately (8/1/04).