Bylaws

A. Adherence with Other Governing Documents. At all times, department policy shall adhere to and be consistent with all university policies found in the FSU Constitution, the BOT-UFF Collective Bargaining Agreement, the Faculty Handbook, and the Annual Memorandum on the Promotion and Tenure Process issued by the Office of Faculty Development and Advancement. 

B. Bylaws Revision. Any three voting members of the Department may propose an amendment to these bylaws. A proposed amendment must be made available to the voting members at or before a departmental meeting that occurs at least two weeks prior to the date of the meeting at which a vote on adoption is to be taken. To be adopted, a proposed amendment must receive an affirmative vote by two-thirds of the members present and voting (including proxies), assuming a quorum. In the event of an emergency, a proposed amendment may be adopted at the same meeting in which it is presented if it receives an affirmative vote by three-fourths of the members present and voting. All voting on proposed amendments shall be conducted by secret ballot. Faculty should be familiar with the content of the bylaws. 

C. Substantive Change Statement. Faculty and staff members are expected to be familiar with and follow the Florida State University Substantive Change Policy as found at regulations.fsu.edu.

A. Faculty Membership. The faculty of the Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Science shall consist of those people holding full-time or part-time appointments at the rank of Teaching Faculty, Assistant in Research, Associate in Research, Research Associate, Specialized Research Faculty I, II and III, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor. 

B. Department Membership. In addition to the faculty defined in II.A above, the following are members of the Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Science: 

• Professor emeriti,
• Temporary or part-time appointees, including those serving as instructors; visiting faculty appointees; courtesy appointees; adjunct appointees; postdoctoral fellows 
• Administrative and Professional personnel 
• University Service Personnel System personnel

C. Faculty Voting Rights. The faculty in the Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Science shall consist of those people holding full-time appointments at the following levels: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Full Professor; Specialized Teaching Faculty I, II, and III; Specialized Research Faculty I, II, and III; and Assistant in Research, Associate in Research, and Senior Research Associate. This is the group that shall vote on all matters unless specified otherwise. 

D. Non-faculty Voting Rights. Non-faculty do not have voting rights.

A. Faculty Meetings. 

I. Kinds and Frequency of Meetings 

The faculty of the department shall meet in regular session once each month, whenever possible, during the regular academic year. The dates of meetings shall be established by the Chair in consultation with the Executive Committee. Dates of departmental meetings shall be distributed early in the fall term. Additional sessions may be called by the Chair or the Chair's designated representative (1) on the Chair's own initiative, (2) at the request of the Executive Committee, or (3) at the written request of six voting department members. Faculty members are expected to attend. 

II. Meeting Structure 

The Chair shall normally preside at faculty meetings. In the absence of the Chair, the Associate Chair(s) shall preside. The Chair shall prepare the agenda for each meeting and distribute copies to the members normally one week prior to the meeting, and faculty members may request in writing that items be included on agendas. A majority of the voting members of the Department shall constitute a quorum at any faculty meeting. If a quorum is not achieved, the meeting may proceed, but no votes may be taken. Meetings shall be conducted in accordance with Robert's Rules of Order, latest revision, except as otherwise provided in these bylaws. The Departmental Administrative Assistant shall serve as Secretary. In the absence of the Secretary, the Chair shall appoint a substitute. The duties of the Secretary shall be: 

• to record the minutes of departmental meetings; 
• to distribute copies of minutes to all departmental faculty members within one week following the meeting; and, 
• to keep in the departmental office a complete file of departmental minutes. The first order of business at each meeting shall be the disposition of the minutes of the previous meeting. 

III. Voting 

A majority of those voting on an issue is required for its passage. The majority is to be based on the percentage of votes cast, not the percentage of eligible voters, unless otherwise stipulated in these bylaws. Voting members of the Department who are on leave, sabbatical, or release time may vote, by electronic means, on departmental issues with the understanding that they make an effort to inform themselves of the issue at hand. Voting faculty may, if they wish, assign their vote on specific issues by proxy to another member of the voting faculty except for promotion and tenure voting. Assignment of proxies must be in writing to the Chair and Associate Chair(s) the day prior to the meeting.

B. Department Chair Selection 

The Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences appoints a chair to serve at their pleasure (typically a three-year term). A candidate or small list of candidates for the Chair’s position is recommended to the Dean by the faculty as a whole. The procedure by which the recommendation is made is that a Chair search committee is formed by the Dean, choosing from a list of recommended members of the Department elected by the faculty. The Chair search committee is formed at the beginning of the last academic year of the sitting Chair’s term and the list is presented to the Dean at a time he or she prescribes. This committee is composed of Department representatives (including one member from the three curricular group representatives, one specialized faculty representative, one staff member, and with discussion with graduate student representatives), plus one member from the College of Arts and Sciences at large, appointed by the Dean. The committee has the option of recommending the current Departmental Chair to continue for another term. The departmental committee members confer with the faculty and others at their discretion to either determine if the Department wishes to retain the sitting Chair or to develop a short list of candidates for the Chair appointment. Candidates are interviewed by the faculty, and the committee will solicit a ranking of the candidates from the faculty via anonymous vote. Ultimately, the committee recommends a list to the Dean. The Dean receives the recommendation as advice but is not bound by the recommendation.

C. Department Leadership and Committees

1. The Chair 

The Chair is the chief executive officer of the department. Among the duties are:

• Responsibility for meeting the department’s administrative obligations. 
• Take the lead in matters that concern the collective welfare of the department in conjunction with the Executive Committee. 
• Prepare an annual operating budget and previous year-end financial report. These documents shall be presented to the faculty as early in the academic year as circumstances permit. 
• Assign duties to each tenured, tenure-track or Specialized Faculty member via the Assignment of Responsibilities. 
• Perform annual faculty and staff evaluations as guided by Appendix C to this document and based on the quality of the work performed by the faculty or staff member. Contributions to teaching, research and service are considered and weighted according to the Assignment of Responsibilities for that faculty member as are recommendations of the Faculty Evaluation Committee (see below). 
• Responsible for completing the narrative for 3rd-year reviews for Assistant Professors. (A draft review is completed by the faculty Mentoring Committee.) 
• Supervise the department staff (directly or indirectly). 
• Recommend salary merit increases to the Dean with input from the Faculty Evaluation Committee, following the procedure outlined in Appendix C. 
• Provide faculty members with written evaluations as required in Appendix C. 
• Coordinate, with the advice of appropriate committees and officers of the department, all segments of the academic program, such as degree requirements, curricular offerings, and catalog announcements. The Chair shall determine and supervise, in consultation with appropriate committees, such matters as the scheduling of classes and the assignment of duties to faculty members.
• Serve as liaison officer and departmental representative to officers and bodies outside the department except when provided for otherwise. 
• Report to the faculty on the actions performed in administering departmental affairs. 
• Facilitate student exit interviews.

2. The Associate Chair(s) 

The Associate Chair(s) are selected by the Chair for a three-year term and ratified by a majority vote of the faculty. The Associate Chair(s) act for the Chair in their absence and serves as voting member(s) of the Executive Committee (described below). 

3. The Executive Committee 

The Executive Committee is composed of four (or more) tenured or tenure-track faculty members, one from each curricular group, chosen by election from the members of that curricular group, and the Associate Chair(s). Representatives may designate a substitute in the event that they are not able to attend a meeting of the Executive Committee. Executive Committee members serve two-year terms. The Chair is an ex-officio, non-voting member of the Executive Committee. Members of the Executive Committee have signature authority for transmittal forms that do not commit department resources. Only the Chair or the direct designee are allowed to sign documents committing department resources.

4. Graduate Program Chair 

The Department shall have a Graduate Program Chair to be appointed by the Department Chair. The duties of the Graduate Program Chair will be to meet with and coordinate the activities of the three Area Admissions and Curriculum Subcommittees (see below) and report to and coordinate graduate program issues with the Department Chair. 

5. Area Graduate Admissions and Curriculum Committees 

The faculty shall elect a graduate admissions and curriculum committee consisting of subcommittees serving two-year terms by the degree-specific faculties. These program area subcommittees will make admission recommendationsto the Chair. The area subcommittees will be responsible for graduate admissions and admissions criteria, and the graduate curriculum in each degree area. Changes in graduate admission and/or curriculum policy in each discipline will go through the corresponding area subcommittee first and then through the faculty within the given degree area. Issues such as admission from the B.S. directly into the Ph.D. programs should be handled by the respective subcommittees. Issues of overlapping curricula (interdisciplinary) or interdisciplinary deficiencies in curricula should be dealt with by two or three (as appropriate) of the area subcommittees acting as a single committee and a recommendation made to the faculty for ratification.

6. Graduate Representative Committee 

A Graduate Representative Committee will be elected by the graduate student body to provide advice and concerns to the faculty on various educational/teaching/research issues. This committee should contain six full-time graduate students, two from each of the three curricular groups. Members of this committee are invited to attend regular curricular and departmental faculty meetings. 

7. Director of Undergraduate Studies 

The Director of Undergraduate Studies shall be appointed by the Chair for a two-year term. The duties of the office shall be concerned with undergraduate students' affairs including coordinating matters relating to undergraduate training in the Department such as but not limited to; curricula, recruitment and admission of students, program requirements, etc., and planning and coordinating upper- and lower-division advising assignments, orientation meetings for new students, etc.

8. Undergraduate Program Committee 

This committee shall establish and help implement policies relating to undergraduate education, curriculum changes, and advising (both lower- and upper-division). The committee shall consist of one faculty member, elected by the program area faculty, representing each undergraduate degree. The Chair will designate one member of the committee to be Director of Undergraduate Studies. The committee will draw upon expertise from individual curricula groups for guidance when appropriate. 

9. Buildings and Space Sub-Committee 

This committee shall make recommendations for the utilization of space assigned to this department. The committee is composed of one individual elected from each curricular group and committee members serve three-year terms. This committee shall establish procedures for the assignment of offices to faculty and students, and research and storage space. This committee shall also consider future space needs based on changes in faculty, research programs, etc. The committee shall meet during the first month of each semester and sets its calendar for the remainder of the semester based upon charges given by the Chair. The members of this committee from each curricular group will be given prime responsibility for space issues associated with that curricular group.

10. Committee on Professionalism in Education and Research 

This committee shall make recommendations on practices and policies for the department to achieve and maintain an environment of professionalism in the classroom, in field science, in research and in service activities for all faculty, staff, and students. 

The committee chair and committee members are appointed by the chair. The three curricular groups, graduate student representative from each group, specialized faculty, postdoctoral fellow, and staff will have at least one representative. The chair and associate chair are ex-officio members.

11. Computer Sub-Committee

This committee annually review and recommend possible changes to the Department maintained computing systems, including the administrative system. The committee will be composed of one faculty member elected from each curricular group and the one staff from the computer system personnel. Faculty serve three-year terms. The supervisor of the department computer systems personnel shall conduct their annual evaluations. The criteria for evaluations are given in the position description. The Chair shall review the annual evaluations and communicate the evaluation to computer systems personnel. The committee shall maintain and update the Department’s computing policy document as necessary.

12. Awards Committee 

This committee shall gather appropriate information and nominate faculty and students for applicable professional awards on the local, national and international levels. This committee shall consist of five members elected forstaggered two-year terms. 

13. Other Committees 

The Chair shall establish such additional committees for the 12-month academic year as are needed to conduct the affairs of the department. The functions and membership of each committee shall be made known to the department as soon as practicable in the academic year.

A. Faculty Senators 

The department will elect its faculty senators and official alternates at such times as are specified by the constitution of the Faculty Senate. The senators are responsible for attending faculty senate meetings and informing the department of developments affecting the department and its members. In case of a vacancy, the department’s associate chair solicits nominations. The nominations will be voted on by the whole faculty either at a faculty meeting or through anonymous electronic polling. 

B. Faculty Recruitment 

The Department places the highest priority on hiring the best quality faculty possible. We expect these faculty hires to strive for and obtain excellence in the three areas of teaching, research and service. The faculty recruiting process normally begins during the Spring semester when the three program (curricula) groups meet independently to discuss future programmatic needs in regards to faculty additions. These needs may arise as a result of faculty losses (retirements, etc.), increased enrollment pressure, or perceived opportunities in the areas of research/program development. The full EOAS faculty will then meet to discuss and consider the requests/needs of each program (curricula) group. Following that discussion, the Executive committee and the Chair will develop a hiring plan/request which they feel best solves the Department’s curricula and programmatic needs, best enhances the Department’s position to compete in the global academic market, and presents the strongest possible hiring argument to the higher administration.

Once decisions of needed new faculty teaching/research specialties have been made, the Executive Committee and Chair will prepare the details of a hiring request to be forwarded to the Dean. 

Search committee/committees will be appointed by the Chair for each faculty line requested. This committee/committees will include a member of one of the program (curricula) groups not in the area of specialty of the proposed faculty hire. The Search committee/committees will be responsible for drafting an advertisement to be approved by the Executive Committee and Chair. Once the ad has gone out, the Search committee/committees, with assistance from EOAS staff, will 1) assemble applicant files, 2) compile the necessary University database information on the applicants, 3) analyze the applicant files and recommend a ranking order of applicants to then be reviewed and voted upon by the relevant program (curricula) group, 4) bring the results of this (item 3) discussion and vote to the full EOAS faculty for further discussion and a final vote, 5) arrange for campus interviews/visits by the top candidates, and 6) serve as the lead committee in hosting candidate visits.

Following on-campus interviews, the Search committee/committees will meet with the revenant program (curricula) group to further discuss the candidacy of the interviewees and hold a vote with that program (curricula) group for the final ranking the candidates. That ranking will then be presented to the full EOAS faculty for further discussion and a final vote. The Chair will then proceed to negotiate the hiring of candidates with the candidates and the Dean.

C. Unit Reorganization

Significant unit reorganization would involve a modification to these bylaws, and thus is subject to the bylaws revision procedure outlined above.

Development and review of the curriculum for the degrees is the responsibility of the committees and chairs as outlined in Section III-C item 4-8.

A. Peer Involvement in Annual Performance and Merit Evaluation. 

Each faculty member’s performance will be evaluated relative to their assigned duties. Each faculty member’s performance will be rated annually using the following university rating scale: 

1. Exceeds Expectations 
2. Meets Expectations 
3. Official Concern 
4. Does Not Meet Expectations

The procedure for annual and merit evaluations are described in Appendix B.

Evidence of Performance (EOP) Evaluation Committee

An EOP-Evaluation Committee is formed, composed of three faculty members elected from each curricular group each year, for a total of nine persons. The term limit of EOP-Evaluation Committee members is 3 years consecutively, non-tenured faculty are not eligible. Faculty eligible for election to the committee must have received at least "Meets Expectations" performance evaluation in each of the previous three years. Nominations for the EOP Evaluation committee are made to the associate chair, who will check eligibility of those being nominated.

Faculty Evaluation Committee 

The Faculty Evaluation Committee advises the Chair as to the relative performance of each faculty member based on the results of the EOP-Evaluation Committee. The Faculty Evaluation Committee will consist of three members, one from each curricular group. Each curricular group will elect its representative from the members of the EOP-Evaluation Committee. 

At least one specialized faculty member will be elected to participate in the evaluations of specialized faculty. The procedure for annual and merit evaluations are described in Appendix B and the Criteria for Merit Review of Faculty are described in Appendix C.

B. Criteria for Evaluation of Tenure-track Faculty. Describe department-specific criteria for evaluation of tenure-track faculty in the areas of: 

1. Teaching. 
2. Scholarship/Research. 
3. Service. 

The Criteria for Merit Review of Faculty are described in Appendix C

C. Criteria for Evaluation of Specialized Faculty. Describe department-specific criteria for evaluation of specialized faculty in the position-relevant areas of: 

1. Teaching. 
2. Scholarship/Research. 
3. Service. 

The Criteria for Merit Review of specialized Faculty are described in Appendix B

A. Progress Toward Promotion Letter. Each year, every faculty member who is not yet at the highest rank for their position will receive a letter that outlines progress toward promotion and/or tenure. 

B. Third Year Review for Tenure-track Faculty. Tenure-track faculty in their third year of service will receive an evaluation of their progress in meeting the department’s expectations for promotion and tenure as detailed in Appendix A. 

C. Peer Involvement in Evaluation of Promotion and Tenure of Faculty. Peer involvement in the evaluation of promotion and tenure of faculty is provided by the relevant Mentoring Committee on an annual basis via their input into the annual letters. And, of course, the Promotion and Tenure Committee (all Associate & Full Professors on votes for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor; all Full Professors on votes for promotion to Full Professor) votes on the issue of promotion and/or tenure at the appropriate time.

D. Criteria for Promotion and Tenure of Tenure-track Faculty. The Criteria are described in Appendix A. 

E. Criteria for Promotion of Specialized Faculty. The Criteria are described in Appendix B.

A tenure and promotion mentoring committee (P&T) will be established for each new tenuretrack appointment at the rank of Assistant Professor. The committee will be composed of at least two faculty members holding the rank of Associate Professor or Professor. Members of the committee will be selected by the candidate in consultation with the Chair. The purpose of the committee is to mentor the candidate through the probationary period, provide teaching peer reviews, advise the Chair in annual evaluations, and assist the Chair in the critical 3rd year reviews. The Mentoring Committee will provide a written evaluation to the Chair for the third year review and the Chair will provide the evaluation letter, described below, to the candidate. The evaluation advises the faculty member of their progress toward tenure and promotion and makes a recommendation for reappointment. 

The evaluation will consider student teaching evaluations and peer reviews of teaching, the candidate’s publication record, proposal authorship, participation in professional meetings, and other appropriate scholarly activities. Service at an appropriate level for the probationary period to the Department, College, University, and professional societies will be a component of the review. The outcome of the review shall be communicated to the candidate by letter. The letter must contain a summary following the format:

Summary of Meeting 

The P&T committee reviewed the candidate for promotion (and/or tenure). A majority of the committee expressed that the candidate’s binder provided evidence that the candidate (did not meet/met/exceeded/far exceeded) the norm for their discipline in the area of research (similar sentences can be used for teaching and service). Comments were made regarding the candidate’s strength/weakness in the area of _____, as evidenced by _____.

Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor requires evidence of excellence in teaching, research and service. Evidence for teaching performance includes, but is not limited to, offering courses at a rate characteristic of the candidate’s curricular group, strong student and peer evaluations for courses offered by the faculty candidate since beginning their faculty appointment, and mentoring of graduate students. The faculty candidates for promotion are expected to have developed a national reputation. Evidence of research productivity includes, but is not limited to, a record of publication in peer-reviewed journals, contracts and grants, and presentations given at national meetings. It is expected that a faculty member considered for promotion will be advising graduate students nearing completion of their degree, although completion is not required. Service shall be judged primarily through performance in activities such as Departmental committees, providing peer review, and chairing sessions at professional meetings. The curricular groups will provide guidance to the faculty regarding quality of journals, competitive nature of funding sources, typical levels of student activity, norms for service, and other activities used to evaluate the candidate’s record.

Promotion from Associate Professor to Full Professor requires evidence of excellence in teaching, research and service. Evidence for teaching performance includes, but is not limited to, offering courses at a rate characteristic of the candidate’s curricular group and strong student evaluations for courses offered by the faculty candidate since beginning their faculty appointment or last promotion. Research productivity should have led the faculty candidate to the development of an international reputation. Evidence of research acumen includes, but is not limited to, publications in peer reviewed journals, grants funded through federal or state agencies and presentations at international meetings. It is expected that a faculty member considered for this promotion will have advised at least one student successfully to a PhD degree. Service shall be judged primarily through performance in activities such as Departmental and University committees, service to professional organizations, serving on editorial panels and peer-review panels. The curricular groups will provide guidance to the faculty regarding quality of journals, federal and state funding agencies, typical levels of student activity, norms for departmental service, and other activities used to evaluate the candidate’s record.

The granting of tenure to an untenured faculty member at the rank of Assistant Professor requires evidence of excellence in teaching and research. Granting tenure to a faculty member holding the rank of Associate Professor or Full Professor requires evidence of excellence in teaching, research, and service. Evidence for teaching performance includes, but is not limited to, offering courses at a rate characteristic of the candidate’s curricular group, strong student and peer evaluations for courses offered by the faculty candidate since beginning their faculty appointment, and mentoring of graduate students. The faculty candidates for tenure at the rank of Assistant Professor are expected to have developed a national reputation, and at the ranks of Associate Professor or Full Professor are expected to have an international reputation. Evidence of research productivity includes, but is not limited to, a record of publication in peer-reviewed journals, grants funded through federal or state agencies, and presentations given at national meetings. It is expected that a faculty member considered for tenure will be advising graduate students nearing completion of their degree, although completion is not required. Service shall be judged primarily through performance in activities such as Departmental and University committees, service to professional organizations, providing peer review, serving on editorial panels and peer-review panels, and chairing sessions at professional meetings. The curricular groups will provide advice to the faculty as a whole as to norms for teaching, research, service, and other activities used to evaluate the candidate’s record.

Criteria for Promotion 

EOAS occasionally hires non-ranked faculty in support of research and teaching. Included in this group are two subgroups — the Research/Teaching Faculty I/II/III series, and the Research Support I/II/III series. The initial promotional criteria for these positions are established by the Collective Bargaining Agreement. A Bachelors’ degree and five years or a Master’s degree and five years in grade in the Department are typically required for promotion in the Research Assistant/Associate/senior series. Typically, a Ph.D. and five years in grade in the Department is required for the Research Faculty series (This requirement is repeated at each promotion level.) Although the period of time in a given rank is normally five years, demonstrated merit, not years of service, shall be the guiding factor. 

Beyond that, assessment is in terms of performance of assigned duties and responsibilities and other contributions to the enhancement of the Department in the scientific and user communities. Elements to be considered are provided below.

A. Evaluation 

Specialized faculty are evaluated based on their performance of their assignments as specified by the Assignment of Responsibilities (AOR). The calendar year annual evaluations are performed by the Chair after consultation of peers (same rank or above). Per the FEC Procedures effective January 1, 2013, Faculty Annual Evaluations will occur during the spring semester of each year and will take into account the weighted performance based on the assigned duties (AOR) over the past year. The FEC reviews all documentation/data submitted by each faculty member as well as pertinent information from other sources as applicable, including peer review, and completes the Annual Evaluation Summary Form, and will attach the required annual evaluation narrative, indicating one of the five performance rating categories below. For faculty who are meeting expectations, there are three categories:

Exceeds Expectations – This describes an individual who exceeds expectations during the evaluation period by virtue of demonstrating noted achievements in teaching, research, and service, which may include several of the following: high level of research/creative activity, professional recognitions, willingness to accept additional responsibilities, high level of commitment to serving students and the overall mission of the Department, involvement/leadership in professional associations, initiative in solving problems or developing new ideas. 

Meets Expectations – This describes an individual who demonstrates the requisite knowledge and skills in their field of specialty and complete assigned responsibilities in a manner that is both timely and consistent with the high expectations of the university.

Official Concern – This describes an individual who demonstrates the requisite knowledge and skills in their field of specialty but is not completing assigned responsibilities in a manner that is consistent with the high standards of the university. 

Does not meet Expectations – This describes an individual who fails to demonstrate with consistency the knowledge, skills, or abilities required in his/her field of specialty and/or in completing assigned responsibilities. A Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) is required when a non-tenured faculty member receives a “Does Not Meet Expectations” rating.

B. Promotion Recommendations 

All Specialized Faculty (Teaching and Research) members who are eligible for promotion will be considered each year. For each eligible candidate, the Chair shall consult with the candidate to determine whether she or he desires to proceed to the preparation of a promotion binder. If the faculty member so desires, the Chair and the faculty member will prepare a promotion binder. Specialized Faculty at ranks beneath the highest rank for which they are eligible receive yearly letters about progress towards promotion. These positions mirror the same hiring requirements as the College of Arts and Sciences’ tenure track positions equivalents. The promotion policies outlined below have been developed in close adherence to the policies as outlined in appendix J of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Definitions and Minimum Requirements for Each Position

Assistant In Research 

Academic master’s degree or highest-level terminal degree from an accredited institution in an appropriate field ofspecialization or equivalent qualifications based on professional experience and otherwise qualified to perform assigned duties. Additional education and experience as required by position. 

Associate In Research 

Academic master’s degree or highest-level terminal degree from an accredited institution in an appropriate field ofspecialization or equivalent qualifications based on professional experience and otherwise qualified to perform assigned duties. Must meet university criteria for promotion to the rank of Associate in Research. Additional education and experience as required by position.

Senior Research Associate 

Master's degree from an accredited institution with demonstrated record of academic research achievement, or professional qualifications in the field of specialization above those which would be equivalent to the highest degree. Must meet university criteria for promotion to the rank of Senior Research Associate. Additional education and experience as required by position. 

Research Faculty I (working title of Assistant Research Scientist) 

Academic doctorate or highest-level terminal degree from an accredited institution in an appropriate field ofspecialization or equivalent qualifications based on professional experience and otherwise qualified to perform assigned duties, with a demonstrated record of achievement in research. Normally will have produced creative work, professional writing or research in refereed and other professional journals. Additional education and experience as required by position.

Research Faculty II (working title of Associate Research Scientist) 

Academic doctorate or highest-level terminal degree from an accredited institution in an appropriate field ofspecialization or equivalent qualifications based on professional experience and otherwise qualified to perform assigned duties, with a demonstrated record of achievement in research. Normally will have produced creative work, professional writing or research in refereed and other professional journals. Must meet university criteria for promotion to the rank of Research Faculty II. Additional education and experience as required by position.

Research Faculty III (working title of Senior Research Scientist) 

Academic doctorate or highest-level terminal degree from an accredited institution in an appropriate field of specialization or equivalent qualifications based on professional experience and otherwise qualified to perform assigned duties, with a demonstrated record of achievement in research. Normally will have produced creative work, professional writing or research in refereed and other professional journals. Must meet university criteria for promotion to the rank of Research Faculty III. Additional education and experience as required by position.

Requirements for Promotion 

The criteria for merit are the same as for promotion. Although the period of time in a given rank is normally five years, demonstrated merit, not yearsof service, shall be the guiding factor. Promotion shall not be automatic, nor may it be regarded as guaranteed upon completion of a given term of service. Early promotion is possible where there is sufficient justification. Promotion in the Specialized Faculty ranks is attained through meritorious performance of assigned duties in the faculty member’s present position. 

1. Promotion to the second rank in each track shall be based on recognition of demonstrated effectiveness in the areas of assigned duties. 

2. Promotion to the third rank in each track shall be based on superior performance in the areas of assigned duties.

All Specialized Faculty promotion decisions shall take into account: 

1. Annual evaluations. 

2. Annual assignment of responsibility (AOR). 

3. Fulfillment of the department/unit written promotion criteria in relation to the assignment in the supervisor’s letter. 

4. Evidence of sustained effectiveness relative to opportunity and according to assignment in the supervisor’s letter. 

5. Assistant In Research/Associate In Research/Senior Research Associate promotion shall take into account: 

1. Evidence of contributions in support of research, as attested by internal letters from collaborators at FSU. 

2. Other research-related activities such as those listed in the Research Faculty Promotion Criteria below and section J.2(b)(3)g in Appendix J of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Research Faculty I, II, and III promotions shall take into account: 

1. Scholarly or creative accomplishments of high quality, appropriate to the field, in the form of books and peer-reviewed scholarly publications. 

2. Success in obtaining external funding, as principal investigator or co-principal investigator on grants. 

3. Recognized standing in the discipline and profession, as attested to by letters from outstanding scholars outside the university. 

4. Other research-related activities, such as chapters in books, articles in refereed and nonrefereed professional journals, musical compositions, exhibits of paintings and sculpture, works of performance art, papers presented at meetings of professional societies, reviews, and research and creative activity that has not yet resulted in publication, display, or performance.

Professional Accomplishment (examples and not limited to) 

• Relevant years of experience 
• Increased effectiveness in the performance of duties
• Demonstrated expertise in the field of specialty 
• Research accomplishments 
• Publications and citations in refereed journals and professional publications 
• Presentations at professional meetings and conferences 
• Features in professional magazines, newsletters, journal covers and professional websites 
• External funding

Professional Recognition (examples and not limited to) 

• Increased recognition as an authority in the field of specialization I
• nvited talks at meetings and universities 
• Membership and/or positions of responsibility in professional organizations 
• Reviewer for professional publications and funding agencies 
• Organization of professional conferences, localseminars and workshops 
• Professional award and other recognitions 

Professional Service (examples and not limited to) 

Service to university, community and profession 

Direction of undergraduate and graduate research 

Community and professional service in support of the outreach activities and the research mission 

Letters of Recommendation 

• Letter from supervisor 
• Letters from Department Chair or Associate Chair 
• For Research Faculty, three letters from outside experts chosen by the Supervisor and Department Chair in consultation with the Candidate.

The department bylaws adhere to and are consistent with University policies found in the FSU Constitution, BOT-UFF Collective Bargaining Agreement, Faculty Handbook, and annual Promotion and Tenure letter

1. Procedures for Evaluation used by the EOP-Evaluation Committee 

a) Faculty Merit File and Evidence of Performance Report. It is each faculty member's responsibility to prepare a short list of accomplishments in teaching, research and service achieved during the past three years. These narratives are limited to one page. This narrative and the EOAS-style FEAS CV for the last three years must be submitted to the department. 

b) Evidence of Performance (EOP) Evaluation committee process The EOP- Evaluation Committee can decide on whether and how to divide up the work and form subgroups, provided that the following rules are observed: 

1. One faculty from each curricular group is present in the subgroup evaluating a faculty member 
2. Members of the subgroup cannot have a conflict of interest (e.g. be related to the faculty member being evaluated) 

2. This EOP-Evaluation Committee evaluates the list of accomplishments and FEAS CV over the past 3 years of each faculty member taking into consideration (1) annual assignment of responsibilities, (2) the Faculty Handbook, and (3) if any, The Collective Bargaining Agreement. Scores for the categories teaching, research and service are assigned and justified in writing following the FSU established ratings. 

3. The evaluations are compiled and reviewed in a final discussion by all committee members. 

4. The EOP-Evaluation Committee writes a short paragraph for each faculty member explaining their consent decision, including ranking according to FSU scale, separated out for teaching, research and service. This procedure ensures that minority group member interests can be addressed and that any context that possibly was not available to a subgroup (e.g. distortions of rating due to the inherent bias in the AORs) can be included in the evaluation.

2) Faculty evaluation committee 

1. Each curricular group elects one faculty member from the EOP evaluation committee to serve on the Faculty Evaluation Committee. The term limit of Faculty Evaluation committee members is 3 years consecutively; non-tenured faculty are not eligible. 

2. Taking into account individual assignment of responsibilities including administrative assignments, the Faculty Evaluation Committee will review EOP Evaluation committee evaluations and present to the Chair an overall evaluation of all Faculty members in each of the four evaluation areas of research, teaching, service and overall performance as either , "exceeds", "meets", "reason for concerns" or "does not meet" expectations. Specifically, the category "Meets Expectations" is based on the typical performance of peers in one's discipline. A summary score for each faculty member is calculated by weighing the teaching, research and service scores according to the weighted mean AOR’s over the past three years. 

3. A tenured faculty member whose overall performance is rated "Does Not Meet Expectations" in two or more of the previous six evaluations may be placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). A PIP will be created for an untenured faculty member who is rated "Does not Meet Expectations" in any area. 

4. The Chair or her/his designee will compile the evaluative statements for each faculty member and provide each faculty member with their distribution. Further, the EOAS Faculty Evaluation Committee will advise the Chair on a ranking to be used in the distribution of merit raises. All faculty merit files will be ranked based on the ratings of EOP evaluation committee, the Faculty Evaluation Committee. All ratings shall be based on the same differentiated scale. The Chair has the ultimate responsibility for both annual evaluation and merit pay recommendations. If the Chair's recommendations for merit rankings differ from those of the Faculty Development Committee, the Chair will notify the Faculty Development Committee and both recommendations will go forward to the Dean and the Provost.

The evaluation shall be based on evidence of teaching effectiveness, scholarly/creative activities, and service as outline in the evidence of performance form. The weighting of evidence shall be informed by the Assignment of Responsibilities. 

The Mentoring Committee is responsible for the 3rd year reviews for Assistant Professors. The Chair is still responsible for the narrative. The Promotion and Tenure review is required as part of the eventual Promotion and Tenure binder.